 | | Re: 2 x Armada Flagship = Armada Warship
|
|
(...) We quibble, but hey, quibbling's fun. I did read the advert, thanks. They're built up from "brass" not Brass. In the pics, they look like brickbuilt to me. What I did NOT spot at the time (and which you didn't either, I guess) was that the (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2 x Armada Flagship = Armada Warship
|
|
<snip> (...) You do not think he is dishonest, you just doubt he is honest? What do you mean? I do not see what your point is? Is there anything wrong even with your worst interpretation of KW intentions? <snip> (...) A thing you'd never do or have (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2 x Armada Flagship = Armada Warship
|
|
You can add "liar" to my list of charms, I guess, but you did ask a decent question.... (...) There are cannons on it built up from brass. Read the advert. (...) I was careful with my wording not to call him out-and-out dishonest. I have never dealt (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2 x Armada Flagship = Armada Warship
|
|
(...) Your eyes must be better than mine, or I haven't read the advert as closely as you have.... where are the non Lego pieces? (...) Seems mostly to be made of those 2 ships to me, although I wouldn't quibble about the odd piece here and there (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2 x Armada Flagship = Armada Warship
|
|
(...) Actually, I wasn't just talking about his .sig. (...) Yup. It's a neat model that A) Isn't wholly made of Lego pieces, let alone made only of two Armada Flagships (which makes me doubt how honestly he's representing his intentions, when he (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2 x Armada Flagship = Armada Warship
|
|
(...) (1) (...) It may well be an advert. So is everything else that appears in signatures that leads the reader to sites where one has things for sale. But a flog? Hardly. It's a neat model. Did you post to .terms because you think it's a violation (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2 x Armada Flagship = Armada Warship
|
|
(...) bit of a flog for your sale. x-posted and FUT lugnet.admin.terms. eric (24 years ago, 28-Jun-00, to lugnet.pirates, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters
|
|
(...) be (...) A Detroit sale is EXTREMELY relevant to a loc.ca.on.<windsor> group, and vice versa. it seems like ALL of Windsor either works in SE michigan, works for a car company, and thus goes to SE michigan a lot on business, or just goes there (...) (24 years ago, 14-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Upcoming Terms of Use Agreement change
|
|
Where are we at on this? It looks like another wave of market posts appearing all over the place is starting. Frank (24 years ago, 13-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4)
|
|
(...) Whether (...) Indeed. But the problem with devolving any sort of power to only a limited number of groups is that other groups may also want it - or assume they already have it. Scott A (24 years ago, 5-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4)
|
|
(...) No, I said .loc.au was a was logical place, not that it was the right place. By "logical place" I mean that common sense might suggest that posting it there might make perfect sense (if someone was clueless about the T&C). (...) It's always (...) (24 years ago, 4-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4)
|
|
(...) Yep. Rule of law and all that. :) (24 years ago, 4-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4)
|
|
(...) BTW - I was rather bemused by this: So even though Mark was "right". He was wrong to break a rule which was wrong even though in doing so he was right? Scott A A more extreme example might be someone wanting to run an auction (...) (24 years ago, 4-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters
|
|
(...) Oh, dear. Of course they will - that is, if we ALLOW certain market posts in ALL of .loc.us there will be a HUGE amount of market posts. Personally, I think that market posts should be allowed in lower-level .loc groups (eg, .loc.us.ma, or (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters
|
|
(...) In practice - the unofficial rule-change in .loc.uk allowing some .market posts through concensous, has been quite easy to remember for me - essentially because I've been a part of that group. If you have nothing to do with a locality, then (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4)
|
|
(...) From a technical standpoint, it is a problem. But I think from a practical POV, it might not actually be a problem - if someone contributes to any group then they should have a say, regardless of nationality. If someone wanted to try and mess (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters
|
|
(...) I thought your first message, which I will paraphrase as "no .market type posts at all in .loc (and other) groups", while at first sounds quite reasonable in an A-R kind of way, completely falls apart when you consider .market.shopping. Many (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4)
|
|
Some thoughts: I don't want to see lugnet.loc.us turn into a jumble of market posts, which could happen if the default was to allow all types of market traffic in the loc groups. One way to handle it is allow the market posts in the loc groups by (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4)
|
|
(...) Wow, you nailed it! That's the feeling I'm beginning to get after reading recent messages from PeterC, PaulB, MarkH, ScottA, and others. To posit a question, how much harm would it do if all types of market traffic were allowed in .loc and (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4)
|
|
(...) I agree - while it wouldn't make sense for a group like .loc.us, for the smaller communities, where there is a _sense_of_community_, .market related posts are more welcome as you are most probably dealing with a friend. I've sent space parts (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.loc.uk)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4)
|
|
(...) people (...) might (...) A good idea. This would well suite posters to loc groups who do not speak English and only want to sell to their "local" area. It would also suit those who list items on ebay.de etc (German Language Ebay). EG: (URL) A (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4)
|
|
(...) A valid suggestion. My only problem with it (and this is my personal view) is that it is creating *another* group which requires monitoring. I'm actually looking at ways to *reduce* the number of groups (possibly because I'm lazy and can't be (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4)
|
|
I understand both Todd and Peter's thoughts, and agree with both... How about creating lugnet.market.loc.xyz groups if a sufficient number of people from that area are interested in a more targeted group. These groups would welcome all market posts (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4)
|
|
(...) .org-based groups (e.g., lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.org.ca.vlc, etc.): yes with respect to market and related things (but obviously no with respect to issues of strict legalities, etc.); .loc-based and other groups: no. (...) Well, if you (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4)
|
|
(...) Todd, I've been musing over this for a while, and this latest incident is a perfect opportunity to raise it with you, and the Lugnet community. Whilst no-one is arguing that Mark has and continues to breach the Lugnet Terms and Conditions, I (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4
|
|
(...) Mark, When you signed up, one of the things you agreed to is that you would not post auction announcements/update...flogs/spam in groups which do not explicitly welcome auctions in their charters. As you are well aware, only (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Upcoming Terms of Use Agreement change
|
|
(...) This is a Good Thing. (...) I've requested this before, but I think it got lost somewhere in the noise of .admin.general: when you make changes to the ToUA, could you post either a follow-up or a Supersede to the original ToUA? The reason is (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Upcoming Terms of Use Agreement change
|
|
(...) As much as I hate doing this... Me too. I think it'll lead to less misunderstanding. -Shiri (24 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Upcoming Terms of Use Agreement change
|
|
(...) Good. This makes a lot of sense. (24 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Upcoming Terms of Use Agreement change
|
|
All, It's long been a point of confusion in the LUGNET Terms of Use Agreement, (URL) or not non-auction market traffic is permitted or verboten in non-market groups. The agreement doesn't specifically state that non-auction flogs (i.e., (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.announce) !
|
| |
| | Re: Question
|
|
I don't mind very short pointer type posts if it is specific to the theme- based group (eg "got some train stuff for sale, see...). I just hate the 5 million re:s. SteveB (...) (24 years ago, 17-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Auczilla XI
|
|
(...) Certainly don't want to stirr up trouble, but I would assume that this thread really doesn't belong outside of lugnet.market.auction (in some ways even more so than an actual auction announcement, because this has extremely little value to (...) (24 years ago, 17-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms) !
|
| |
| | Re: Question
|
|
(...) A suggestion for this future (based on some comments I've seen on rec.toys.lego recently) -- what about creating sub-market groups corresponding to the major non-market groups? lugnet.market.buy-se...ade.castle (...) (24 years ago, 17-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Question
|
|
(...) I don't know if there's going to be an official process for a vote for this in the future, but if you're just interested in straw-poll type numbers, you can add me to the people who think this change would be for the best. eric (24 years ago, 16-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: C'mon already...
|
|
(...) I suppose if I had a choice, this group would be what I'd prefer, but e-mail would certainly be fine too. --Todd (24 years ago, 16-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: auction vs non-auction double standard?
|
|
I'm posting from tree view so just picked one to hang my post on. First let me say that Frank's proposed guidelines/rules are better this iteration than ever, he's really getting good at it! (...) I think this one is... and I'll tell you why. A (...) (24 years ago, 16-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: C'mon already...
|
|
(...) On that note, I'm thinking that Richard's request would have been better suited for email, no? But in case you can't be reached that way, is this the group you'd prefer people try for last ditch admin-ish contact, or a different one? Or is it (...) (24 years ago, 16-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Question
|
|
(...) Yes, please do make this change. Almost anything that increases consistency and reduces the need for judgement is a good thing, IMHO. While you're at it, perhaps some of the other changes batted around recently that almost gelled could be (...) (24 years ago, 16-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Question
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Todd Lehman writes: <snip> (...) Great! It would, really. -Shiri (24 years ago, 15-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Question
|
|
(...) Posting for-sale notices outside of the .market area isn't currently verboten by the written rules of LUGNET Terms of Use Agreement per se, but flogs posted outside of the .market area are still frowned upon by many people. And the .trains (...) (24 years ago, 15-Apr-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
