Subject:
|
Re: Why these news groups were created
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Mon, 20 Sep 2004 03:55:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
6874 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.nntp, Ross Crawford wrote:
> 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
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 hoopla is what is creating the elephant.
Leave it alone. See what happens.
And for crying out loud, stop talking about 'the end of LUGNET' or 'I'm so
pissed I'm leaving!' First, you haven't left yet, so you lied about it.
Secondly, it's playground politics--'I don't like this so I'm takign my ball and
going home!'
Eh, I'm tired, I have a cold, and I'm cranky. The only good news is that I
almost have a 57 lvl Ranger in EQ and I've watched 8 eps of West Wing today (1)
And with that, I'm off to find a cupcake.
Dave K
1- Thus alluding to the plain and simple truth that LIFE GOES ON, PEOPLE! Get
over it.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) [SNIP] (...) [SNIP] (...) That right Dave, only one group us getting attention - nobody asked people their opinions or requested the other seven. 'Leave it alone/Life goes on/get over it.' - you libs (ie your West Wing marathon clues me in on (...) (20 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) The difference being that there was a request for the lgbt group. (...) 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 (...) (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
|
|
|
|
