 | | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
(...) Yes it was misplaced. I was not in the wrong - and Leonard's refusal to comprehend is where the problem started, not with me. (...) WRONG. 100% WRONG Todd. Really, what is hard to understand about what I am saying. Let me pull a quote: "the (...) (22 years ago, 30-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Todd Lehman wrote: . (...) understood and noted. (...) It was not meant in a negative manner. (...) Then with all due respect Todd, he should have taken the time to read past the first sentance. I posted what I was (...) (22 years ago, 30-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
(...) Tim's message was not misplaced, Mark, and you are disrespecting him by telling him that. (...) Perhaps nothing "wrong" but certainly disrespectful. When you said: "If you want to talk about finding your soul mate or others want to talk about (...) (22 years ago, 30-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
(...) I don't have anything to add. (...) If you have something to say to me only, the most effective way to do that is to send it through private e-mail. By the way, I don't appreciate you calling Lenny and Tim lackeys. (...) Lenny misunderstood in (...) (22 years ago, 30-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
(...) Sorry Tim - I was asking honest questions in a very polite way. I was asking honest and fair questions. I was making honest and true suggestions directed to Todd, the owner of this website, in a very polite manner Then Leonard comes in and (...) (22 years ago, 30-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) I fully acknowledge that, Lenny (thus the "IMO";-) (...) I thought it took a village...:-) Look I agree that parents are the final arbiter of matters WRT to their children, but also remember: not all parents are good parents. Of course it is (...) (22 years ago, 30-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
(...) Mark - While I happen to personally agree with the point you are trying to make (to an extent), from an administrative perspective, I don't agree with the way you're trying to make it. Being combative with Lenny isn't going to get you any (...) (22 years ago, 30-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
(...) Again Leonard - I never said it was off topic for the group it was in. Why you keep going back to this point is truly beyond me. Please understand this simple point. My point, again, was the group ITSELF is in the wrong place. As anal as some (...) (22 years ago, 30-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) John, I cant help but point out that you are describing your opinions. It seems to me obvious that each individual parent must be able to decide what is appropriate and safe for their children, and that the parents themselves must enforce this (...) (22 years ago, 29-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) If it is built out of LEGO-- yes. (...) Do you suppose that I'd be so pedantic to suggest otherwise? Seems like .admin might be a good exception. And .test might fit under that hierarchy as well... (...) Ha, you weaken your argument by your (...) (22 years ago, 29-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) But what about when someone shows their wedding cake topper? Is that on-topic? If so, it is ok that it presents sexual content? Do the admin groups remain adult only because they're off-topic also? You have not provided a good reason why (...) (22 years ago, 28-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) Yes, I agree that everybody has different thresholds of what they consider to be appropriate and inappropriate. That is precisely why I would stay away from those type of arguments and simply categorize everything off-topic as being "adult". (...) (22 years ago, 27-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) What do you mean by "sexual" content? Is mentioning that you have a wife sexual? Is a guy mentioning that he has a boyfriend sexual? Is you mentioning that you have a kid sexual? Is a woman mentioning tha she is pregnant sexual? Is mentioning (...) (22 years ago, 27-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Ref upgrade?
|
|
(...) There are problems with Partsref. The counts on the keywords list are, at best, approximate. The search is inaccurate. The biggest problem is that it hasn't been updated in over 2 years. To address your direct concern: the most stable way to (...) (22 years ago, 27-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
(...) Mark, You replied to a User's post[1] with a rationale for why the particular newsgroup belongs on another part of LUGNET. The post in question is perfectly on-topic for the newsgroup it is placed in, fully within the Charter of that group (...) (22 years ago, 27-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Parts Ref upgrade?
|
|
OK. Today I was looking for the 4x4 turntable in the parts ref. So I type in "turntable" thinking its a fairly uncommon word in LEGO parts, and his enter. I get 1 part in the result: (URL) think "Hmmmm thats strange", so I go look up the part (...) (22 years ago, 27-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
(...) Ahh, but Leonard - you missed the point. I never said it did not belong on Lugnet, and I never said it did not belong in .people - did I? (...) I think you are also missing the entire point of Lugnet and posting messages to Lugnet -- Lugnet it (...) (22 years ago, 27-Sep-04, to lugnet.people.singles, lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
(...) Ahh, but Mark.. you missed the charter of lugnet.people: "lugnet.people– All about LEGO® people (enthusiasts, fans, maniacs, collectors, builders, etc.)" And since Todd is clearly a "LEGO people" - any post about Todd should be on-topic for (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-04, to lugnet.people.singles, lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
(...) Todd, As much as I wish you luck on your search - can you explain why this does not belong in off-topic? I draw your attention to the group charter of off-topic: "Off-topic (non-LEGO®) discussions" - this is what your post was, non-LEGO® (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-04, to lugnet.people.singles, lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) Which is just as well, because I didn't. (...) Ah, I just bought the set tonite. So, in fact, you were actually referring to a word that the Futurama writers made up:-) (...) No, just all completely off-topic. (...) Why this fixation on the (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
