 | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings —John Hansen
|
| | | (...) [...] (...) The problem this email address filter does not (and cannot) solve and actually exacerbates is the "is this an official voice of TLC or not" problem. Presuming it becomes simple for Jake and Tomas to post using their secret AFOL (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | (...) That's hard to judge until a few months have passed. I have a very good feeling about this. (...) It's impossible to answer that question completely, since it's a fuzzy thing. However, we should trust that Brad and his people will do the right (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) Unless you sign YOUR posts as "news admin" or something similarly official, I certainly do wonder when they are official or unoffical, so yes, I agree. ++Lar (23 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Official vs. unofficial postings — Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) I've been giving this a lot of thought, and upon your recommendations, Larry, I've decided to change the way I post. I haven't decided on an official LUGNET admin sig yet, but for starters I'll definitely be making the 'From:' header be an (...) (23 years ago, 25-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Official vs. unofficial postings —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) I think that's a great idea. (...) You *could* do that. but I think the message is more important than the package. What matters more to me is the signature rather than how it got posted... (...) I'm not sure I would do that. I think you need (...) (23 years ago, 25-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings —John Hansen
|
| | | | (...) An official post requires a certain stationary (aka email address domain) and a particular signature with specific elements in it. Have I understood you correctly? Is this actually documented anywhere? This would seem to suggest that lacking a (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings —Mike Faunce
|
| | | | "John Hansen" <JohnBinder@aol.com> wrote in message news:GAIqxs.73o@lugnet.com... (...) content (...) official (...) Content (...) Really? So you put just as much value in an article that is published in the Ridgemont High Student Newspaper as the (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) I think you're totally correct. In the general case, that is. Just not in this case In this case, if Jake, for example, posts something from a personal address and says "this is the real deal" I am only infinitesimally less likely to trust its (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings —John Hansen
|
| | | | (...) Conveyance, as I used it, is the mode of submission. Lugnet is the publisher of all posts herein. Posts may be submitted by authors on a variety of paper types (aka email address domains). The author of a piece determines credibility far more (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | |
