 | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) I hear the sentiment but I have to come out and say this: You pay (to become a member) which gives you right to use LUGNET in whatever form or shape it is in, subject to your not violating the ToS, not for the right to influence that form or (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) Unfortunately, me too. Did I me too this already? I forget...and since there are no convenient dots, I can't easily tell. -Tim (feeling rather lazy) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
(...) I'm not sure any newsreaders (besides Lugnet's web interface) use that fact, but if the newsreader fully indexes the whole news spool, it could easily present the user with all the replies to a given post. (...) I doubt it. Mostly because I (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Plz read
|
|
I've only been glancing at the thread, and i still say it's todd's call, whether we agree with it or not. and also, i'm not sure it's appropriate to try and organize a desertion on the very same community that some people seem to have a problem (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | My Point Of View !!!
|
|
(...) Yes, the latest LEGO train posting might have been a marketing post, but it's been an extremely interesting one! I have never seen an uninteresting posting from any LD employee so far. And even it would be pure marketing, I'd still rather (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) A big resounding ME TOO! (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
Dan, I think it is a question of representation. It appeared to me when I paid money that I was becoming a member of LUGNET, whatever that means. The description of membership does not call the payment a 'donation' ; it is a payment of what you (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Plz read
|
|
(...) See lugnet.admin.nntp.... (...) Yes and no (mostly yes). Yes, it is Todd's and Suzanne's site, but without us the whole brew-ha-ha would be meaningless, so in a way it is OUR site. And notice Paul isn't even claiming that we should set the (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) I agree with most of what you said, but read the thread, we already _have_ gotten a reason. -Tim (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) Difference in philosophy, then, I guess. I in no way intend to diminish the service Todd and Suz have done to the community - I appreciate their efforts greatly and a lot of people have benefitted. The fact that this site exists doesn't give (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) I am glad you have gotten more out of Lugnet than you paid for, thats a good thing. But, without us, there would be no lugnet, I am assuming that the webhosting is not free - and that the membership fees were to help keep Lugnet going - true (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) I wholehartedly disagree. you decided you want to donate some money to lugnet, great. I think of it as paying for services I _already_ recieved from lugnet... I don't think we're stockholders that can set policy, or even need to be consulted. (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: I can't access LUGNET through nntp today
|
|
(...) if it's sending back a RST ACK that means the port is closed on your workstation, and that's all the server wanted to know... since from your earlier log didn't mention anything about resets being sent back to lugnet, I just assumed it was (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) Good point! Something that someone mentioned to me today but I forgot about since then. I'm a paying member and that should say something. I'm also sure other large contributors (unfortunately due to my financial state, I was only able to give (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: ME TOO
|
|
(...) I have to put in a hearty 'mee too' with you, Christian. (...) Its lost value for me too. I prefer open communication, and not every post of theirs at a lego.com address outside of lego.* groups can be considered a marketing agenda. Give me a (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
