To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.nntpOpen lugnet.admin.nntp in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / NNTP / 526 (-10)
  Re: ME TOO
 
(...) Just to get my "vote" in, I want to say a "me too" to this as well. I believe it is not in my best interest to have this restriction in place. I think we should hear other (more) people's feelings on this as well. It is interesting that the (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
 
  Re: I can't access LUGNET through nntp today
 
"Dan Boger" <dan@peeron.com> wrote in message news:3AB27414.909030...ron.com... (...) that (...) 30 - (...) Dan, thanks for your suggestions! Unfortunately, rejecting connections to port 113 is exactly what I am doing now. (See, I usually don't (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
 
  Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
 
Sorry to clutter things up with separate posts: Another issue is the fact that many LUGNET members have paid good money to become members. I think those people's voices MUST (at least a strong should...) be heard on this issue. We paid in part to (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
 
  Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
 
(...) Eric - I am truly disturbed by this, and I am taking it personally. There is no need for any personal jabs. What I said was sarcastic, and If you could not see that then I do not know what to tell you. My point is simple: You (as a group) keep (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
 
  Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
 
Here's a snippet from Todd's original post: (...) Something that Lego (TLC) did "made it apparent" that these boundaries needed to be reclarified. Well, no one in this thread, except Todd and maybe someone from TLC, knows what horrible thing (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.lego.direct)  
 
  ME TOO
 
(...) Usually, I am not the buy who steps in for a "mee too" (as this is mostly useless On Lugnet when talking about MOCs or new products. However, as this is a really important subject for the entire philosophy of Lugnet, I had to emphasize Mikes (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.nntp)
 
  Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
 
(...) I am not trying to convince anybody of anything -I am just looking for *real* answers. What is being served to us is swine, nothing more. Mark P. mfuss903@aol.com (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
 
  Re: New Group Proposal - LUGNET.LEGO.QA
 
(...) Yah I wanted to say lugnet.lego.q&a but I have a feeling special characters might be a problem. I was just trying to think of something short and sweet, I really don't care what it is called if it were to come into exsistance. Eric Kingsley (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
 
  Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
 
(...) Spoken, truly, like someone who has no idea how the Real World works. Sometimes I forget that not everyone on Lugnet is an adult. eric (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
 
  Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
 
(...) Adding another voice, not that it will change things... (...) Todd, I think Larry is laying the rhetoric fairly thick here, but if you scrape it off, I have to agree with him. I'm still of two minds wether or not it "matters" that LEGO people (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR