Subject:
|
Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Thu, 30 Sep 2004 20:19:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3040 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Todd Lehman wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Mark Papenfuss wrote:
> > off topic ---> people ---> people subgroups (as they currently are)
> > got it now?
>
> Still yes.
good ;) But that is not what you said I was asking for. So I am glad it is NOW
yes, but I don't think it is "still yes".
> > And sorry Todd, what you quoted was not disrespectful. I never said you
> > should not be posting that. All I said was that it did NOT belong mixed
> > in with Lego MOC, etc postings. If you honestly took that as disrespectful
> > - then wow - I have no idea what to tell you.
>
> It shows disrespect to post a direct reply to a random and innocent message
> in a group when you think that the group itself is misplaced, and not the
> message.
I am sorry you took that as disrespectful. It was not the intention. More on
this below (1).
> It also shows disrespect to other admins to continue arguing the
> point with them once it's already been clearly made. (That said, I
> understand that you felt unfairly attacked by Lenny. In the future, it's
> probably more effective to reply more objectively and calmly when you feel
> that way. Just a suggestion.)
See, I would agree with you on the point that it "also shows disrespect to other
admins to continue arguing the point with them once it's already been clearly
made" ONLY if Leonard got it, but he very clearly did NOT get it and kept
insisting that I was talking about something else. This is very easily shown
when in the last part of his last post he said: "Furthermore, if you are
out-lining why .people discussion belongs in off-topic.." (taken from
http://news.lugnet.com/admin/suggestions/?n=1037 ). IF he got it, why would he
need to say “if you are out-lining” – that is very clearly what I was doing. My
point was crystal in each of my posts.. and he refused to get it, and while he
was refusing to get it he was accusing me of attacking and trolling. THAT made
me upset, and very rightfully so. If you do not agree with that then I am sorry.
But my 3 year old listens, and understands, better than Leonard did there.
> > [...] then I am truly sorry you took it that way, it was not meant
> > in that way at all. But I honestly can’t see how you took that as
> > disrespectful in any way.
>
> It would've shown a lot more respect -- and tact -- if you'd've started
> a brand new thread in .admin.suggestions, saying something like this:
(1) I kept a a watch on all the other topics about these groups and have not
seen a reply from you (not saying you did not make one, just that I did not see
it). So I took your post as a direct chance to get you to see it. Yes I could
have made a new thread. But I do not see my replying to your post as the wrong
thing to do.
> Have you set yours this way? If no, why not? If yes, how did you happen
> to stumble across my post?
I have since yes. But that is not the point. There is no way you can tell me
that gay marriage talk is in-topic with Lego MOC postings and belongs mixed in
with Lego MOC postings. And I will say it again -- As anal as
some of the people are around here about posting in the correct place and
keeping the tight compartmentalization in place I find it odd that these 100%
off-topic posts (despite the fact the posts themselves may be in the correct
group – the point is the group itself is in the wrong group) are allowed outside
the off-topic forum.
I have really stated my stance here and have nothing more to add. Thank you for
your time, and sorry for any misunderstandings that may have taken place with
you Todd.
Mark P
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
| (...) That was really a not cool thing of you to just say. (...) The extent to which any given group is "on-topic" (e.g., LEGO-focused) or "off-topic" (e.g., non-LEGO) is not a 0 or 1 but a fuzzy value in-between. For example, many posts in the .loc (...) (20 years ago, 30-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
| (...) Yup. I heard you say that loud and clear. (...) Still yes. (...) It shows disrespect to post a direct reply to a random and innocent message in a group when you think that the group itself is misplaced, and not the message. It also shows (...) (20 years ago, 30-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
