Subject:
|
Re: Why these news groups were created
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Mon, 20 Sep 2004 03:38:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
6853 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.nntp, Eric Smith wrote:
| |
| |
Some have suggested that sexual orientation has no business being openly
discussed on LUGNET. This opinion is quite respectable, but it does not
recognize that sexual orientation is as much an identifying aspect of life
for some people as, say, religion or occupation or hobbies are for others.
Some have suggested that certain religious beliefs are being actively
ignored, and that allowing the creation of an LGBT group, which openly
embraces a lifestyle that is counter to those beliefs, is disrespectful to
those beliefs. The fact is that while LUGNET respects all religious
beliefs, it is also religion-neutral. Thus, religous beliefs play no role
here in determining whether or not the creation of an LGBT group is
warranted.
|
So if LUGNET is religion neutral, why can’t it be sexually neutral too? If
you don’t see a need for a religious-oriented group, it follows that there’s
no need for this type of group either.
|
The difference being that there was a request for the lgbt group.
| |
You talk about how people can simply not look at this stuff, but there is a
problem. We tell parents at our shows about LUGNET. The first time they come
visit the highlighted articles on the home page are talking about LGBT
rubbish. I certainly wouldn’t want that to be the first thing people see when
they visit. LUGNET has always been a safe place to discuss LEGO topics
without the fear of running into something that many people would rather just
avoid. I’m afraid that’s no longer possible with the addition of these
severely off-topic groups.
|
They are only on the front page because ENOUGH LUGNET MEMBERS THOUGHT THEY WERE
IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO HIGHLIGHT THEM!! It is not because the group is there. The
whole discussion could have been kept off the front page had members just chosen
not to highlight it.
ROSCO
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) And I completely concur--there were 8 new NG's, and yet one is getting all the attention. If people weren't pointing at it, or highlighting it, or yapping about it, nobody would have noticed it. There is no elephant in the livingroom--all this (...) (20 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
| | | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) LUGNET currently has 2,500+ members. I've seen many times where a post has gotten on the LUGNET front page with just a single person spotlighting it. One person spotlights a gay post, and everyone who comes to LUGNET for the first time could (...) (20 years ago, 21-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) So if LUGNET is religion neutral, why can't it be sexually neutral too? If you don't see a need for a religious-oriented group, it follows that there's no need for this type of group either. You talk about how people can simply not look at (...) (20 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
151 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
