 | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) Two points: 1. I'm not particularly bothered if what I said to Eric comes off as kind of insulting. He has a few "kind of" insults coming as he's been rather rude to a number of people on this and other occasions. 2. Nevertheless, if you take (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
(...) Mark, in the future when you misquote me and completely mischaracterize what I said and meant, I would really appreciate it if you would be courteous enough to provide a link to what I actually said. For example: (URL) I said was that it is "a (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) You'll get to see that. --Todd (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) Larry, what you wrote above to Eric is kind of insulting, and I think it's backwards. Eric and I happen to see eye-to-eye on a lot of things and it's one of the reasons that we're friends. We also happen to disagree on a lot of things, and I (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) Hmm. Personally, I think this is entirely misguided, in the following sense: if you're going to restrict postings at all, I'd much rather see less _non_-Lego employee traffic in e.g. lugnet.lego.direct. What exactly is the problem you think (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | A letter to Todd
|
|
Todd, Let me start off by saying I respect all the work and effort you have put into creating this site, it truly is a great site, and I DO love your site! I have from the first time I came here, nothing will change that. And I know this is your (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) You're absolutely right, Larry...you're absolutely right. And thanks for acknowledging the last portion of that above. But let's try really hard not to assume that the current state of web posting will necessarily still be the case in the (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) This is important, yes, and we should talk about options that best enable dissemination by LEGO of such information. I would not be opposed to deleting the lugnet.announce.lsahs group and moving its content to lugnet.lego.announce or some new (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
(...) Tom, 1) This doesn't relegate anyone to "second class citizenship." 2) If this had been done one year ago, at a time when Brad was the only LEGO employee posting here (and posting to .dear-lego and .lego.direct only), I guarantee you that not (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) Exactly. The ultimate tipping point was the Bionicle thread on Thursday, but the tipping point isn't really relevant. Rather, it was a sudden realization based on recent events (not the events themselves) that we'd totally forgotten to put (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) "Yesterday" in this context is wednesday last, I think, as the filter was put in place Thursday, I think. I know for a fact that the train contest reminder was posted after the filter was put in place, based on correspondence. I speculate it (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) My goodness, how many times does this need to be repeated? It's easy to get an email. Easy, but irrelevant to the argument. I have 5. So what? It's HARD to toggle posting settings here. You minimise that as being something that technically (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) True. We don't know the actual number of agree/disagree/undecided. Probably never will. My gut tells me more disagree, though, at least for now. Yours may differ. (people tend to think others agree with them) But irrelevant, ultimately. It's (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) done to LEGO employees posting with their LEGO account, as far as I can see. I was interested in learning what "yesterday's event" was, which apparently triggered the above change. (...) So if I understand this correctly, the announcement of (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Top 1000 noisemakers (was: Re: Posting frequency?)
|
|
(...) Snip! (...) SNIP!! WEE! I average one post a day, so here's too meeting my blabbermouth quota!! It is likely that now that I have my web site back, and there is an end in sight to my storage dilema that I'll be posting more frequently in the (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) How does it relegate them to second class citizen status? They are still more than welcome to post anywhere they want, using a non-LEGO address. And given Yahoo, Hotmail, etc, it's neither hard nor expensive to obtain a second email address (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) I would not go assuming that. Just because the "vocal majority" does not like this right now does not mean that only 3 people agree with Todd. Remember one of the dynamics of Newsgroups is that people that disagree with a situation are much (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | I understand, but can we make it better?
|
|
On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Todd Lehman (<3ab2f0a6.152546955...gnet.com>) wrote at 05:06:00 (...) The severe nature of the original post certainly took me aback, and I think that's part of what has fuelled this debate. I started off in the 'this is a Very (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) easier (...) Hmm, actually you're arguing the other side here... All of the official LEGO posts being in one place makes them *easier* to find than is the current state. James (still on the fence...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
Bravo Tom, bravo - very well put! Mark P mfuss903@aol.com (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
