 | | Re: Censorship (was Re: Bye, bye LUGNET)
|
|
(...) I agree that a language filter is a valid approch to this issue as long as the original, unfiltered post is available and, much like the skip filter now, the language filter is a user settable option (i.e. on by default but off if the user (...) (21 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Censorship (was Re: Bye, bye LUGNET)
|
|
Forgot to answer this portion in previous post... (...) I think we'd all agree the current process is inherently inefficient and completely human-driven, and appears somewhat arbitrary. Nobody is arguing that something far better needs to be (...) (21 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Request for .vignette group
|
|
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Nelson Yrizarry wrote: <snip> (...) I second this motion... (21 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Request for .vignette group
|
|
(...) It has been a little over 4 months now since my initial post on the topic, and I am following up. Personally, I think vignettes have proven their staying power, and that the number of posts and MOCs have increased, not diminished. Therefore, I (...) (21 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting setup (was Re: LDraw.org Contributer Agreement Status
|
|
(...) I do to. I wish I had the time and inclination to write an NNTP client that would post via the web (it should be quite feasible). It would of course have to fill in the Lugnet login form for you to get the cookie (or figure out how to "borrow" (...) (21 years ago, 21-Feb-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: leaving LUGNET
|
|
(...) AFAIK, yes. When you just set the page to a blank, it IS just another version. The older version would be availalbe for everyone to see with some arcane syntax. (21 years ago, 5-Feb-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: leaving LUGNET
|
|
(...) I only said it was rude and *arguably* had legal implications. That is still my opinion. I doubt I would personally even investigate legal action if my pages were restored after I deleted them, but it would certainly sour my taste of Lugnet. (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: leaving LUGNET
|
|
(...) Again, I'm not saying that Lugnet really shouldn't remove data if someone asks. But if there's going to be an easily accessible system, I'd prefer "hide" over "remove". If there's a court order, or someone really does specify that they want (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: leaving LUGNET
|
|
(...) But see also the ToS, point 7: - start - 7. By posting messages, uploading files, inputting data, or engaging in any other form of communication through this service, you are granting LUGNET and its owners a perpetual, irrevocable, royalty- (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: leaving LUGNET
|
|
(...) Of course does anyone actually support a NNTP server feed off of Lugnet (as opposed to individual reads which only get posts that you are actually interested in)? On the other hand, a cancel DOES NOT delete the post, it just removes it from (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
