 | | Re: LEGOfactory.com launches... and it's big!
|
|
(...) For future reference, you should make sure URLs begin with http:// otherwise Lugnet treats it as a local reference. ROSCO FUT .admin.nntp (20 years ago, 10-Nov-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 8 new subgroups of lugnet.people (Kids, Teens, Adults, Singles, Couples, Parents, Support, LGBT)
|
|
(...) Gee, thanks. (...) Is your question the result of having carefully read all the articles in that newsgroup and having reflected upon things for a few days, or is it your first response? Just curious. Those who are, do seem to believe that the (...) (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: 8 new subgroups of lugnet.people (Kids, Teens, Adults, Singles, Couples, Parents, Support, LGBT)
|
|
(...) I haven't been reading much Lugnet news lately as I spend most of my online Lego time on lowlug.nl. Somehow, the few times when I came back here I didn't feel I was missing much. This people thing really takes the biscuit though. I'm an adult, (...) (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet question and ldraw updating question
|
|
(...) Read this page: (URL) understand the overall process. It points you to this page: (URL) to actually make changes, such as registering a new email for posting. XFUT admin.nntp ++Lar (20 years ago, 7-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
"Jesse Alan Long" <kiraya_malzant@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:I4BK1F.1Mw6@lugnet.com... snip (...) remember, I (...) and what (...) has (...) being but (...) foolish (...) everyone (...) an (...) life. (...) die (...) the (...) equalty, then (...) (20 years ago, 30-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
(...) LOL!! Actually Jessie, I reckon half the people think you're a troll, half think you're a nutjob, and half think you're a twit. Either way, you're funny as hell! Keep it coming! :] KDJ ___...___ LUGNETer #203, Ontario, Canada (20 years ago, 27-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) Parents could look at it as securing all objectionable content away from their childrens' eyes, or the could look at it as a website that has content that's objectionable enough that kids shouldn't be using it at all. (...) Simply applying the (...) (20 years ago, 25-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
(...) Well, I was not expecting THIS much of a response simply because I said of what I said in my letter. A lot of people must think of me as a narrow-minded, bigoted, right-wing, Bible-thumping homophobe now because I said that it was not a good (...) (20 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) Parents won't always see anything in any particular way, so I don't follow your logic here. (...) Consider how they'd react if LUGNET proudly advertised that it had a gigantic porn library that was accessible by anyone. I don't understand your (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) Parents won't always see it that way. Consider how they'd react if LUGNET proudly advertised that it had a gigantic porn library that was only accessible by those who signed up as being 18+. Setting up a section that's only accessible by (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) That's not the point. What are you saying? That because someone can legally get married at age 16, adult content on LUGNET should be made viewable by a 7 year old? Because a 17 year old knows about same-sex relationships, a 10 year old should (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) I think it has always been thusly (that one could lie about their age). (...) I don't follow what you mean. The objectionable content would be masked from underage viewing. JOHN (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) Of course not. All I'm saying is that if he wants LUGNET to be "kid-friendly", steps need to be taken to make it that way because I think it is getting too adult-oriented in certain areas. (...) Exactly. And when they do check out LUGNET and (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) The point is, Chris, is that that decision should be up to the parents to decide, not you. If Todd wants LUGNET to be for everyone, it must cater to the lowest common denominator, and that is about a 7 year old. (...) Good stuff???? Are you (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) Fine. Now we know your position on the subject. Some, however, may want to take a different position WRT to parents who are deciding whether to allow their kids to use LUGNET. (...) As I have said before: clarity. You have stated your view. I, (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) Or to get married. Or for consent. Or, often, to be tried and punished as an adult. And lets not forget that most kids are officially taught sex-ed as early as jr. high, so that puts them in their early teens. Of course, "gay" gets thrown (...) (20 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) Firstly, yes, that would more-or-less work for existing usership, but new users would be free to lie all they want. Second, everything I've seen says that making a pointedly "adults only" section is just going to make the situation worse, as (...) (20 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) Neither does it obligate him. Parents need to start taking paying attention to what their kids are viewing online, and every attempt to make the internet kid-safe only reinforces their false beliefs that there is nothing that their kids can (...) (20 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) It's kind of funny, but I think that kid-friendly is an awful term for the suggestion that John is propsing. Kid-hostile is closer, but a single term for kid-we-don't-trust-y...-take-part would be better. I don't know, but if my kids found a (...) (20 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) For .admin.nntp: LUGNET has to abide by certain societal restrictions for the sake of liability. In that sense, John's perfectly right. For .o-t.debate: Screw them! Parents withholding what it means to be human by shielding their kids from (...) (20 years ago, 23-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
