 | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) But since when has there been a ban on "marketing" posts in theme groups? Note that the post in question does not advertise any buying, selling, trading, or auctions--which are the activities typically prohibited from theme groups. The item (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Plz read
|
|
(...) I don't think Paul is trying to organize desertion, I think he's well aware of some of the discontent that has been expressed lately and he's probably tired of it. Instead of simply telling everyone to take their disagreements elsewhere, he's (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) I use NNTP at school, in fact, I have Outlook Newsreader open now, but something never works right so it downloads new headers automagically. At school it works, but I'm at home now and it doesn't. Anyways, that shows you that I'm lazier. :-) (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) Oh yea, the dreaded "thread has gotten so big the web interface is difficult to use" problem. That actually is one of the things which keeps me using NNTP - Netscape doesn't give up the ghost and stop threading when the thread reaches some (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
(...) Well, if you're going to play around under the hood of a newsreader... :D (...) Hmm. Not to rain on anyone's parade, but it's not as though LD has really been all that forthcoming up to this point, anyway. IMHO. Questions asked in their (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
