 | | Re: Can you say *** on Lugnet?
|
|
(...) Well, no, not if it's worded nicely. Now, if a 'repeated' offender would get the same message over and over again - now that would be spam. But a 'repeated offender' as such would be needed to be dealt with differently... Is there a way to (...) (25 years ago, 17-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Can you say *** on Lugnet?
|
|
(...) That sounds like a good idea. The only problem that I can see is that some people might view the automated message as spam (even though it's not). Is anyone reading this besides you and me? Some more comment would probably be helpful here. -- (...) (25 years ago, 17-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Can we define flogging?
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) quasi-market-related (...) transactions. (...) whatever (...) cash. (...) From a market perspective, these types of posts probably belong in buy-sell-trade. I think it is reasonable to ask in shopping "could (...) (25 years ago, 17-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Can we define flogging?
|
|
It depends on what the definition of "flogging" is. Sorry, couldn't resist! :) Scott S. F.U.T. off-topic.fun or debate ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator-Affiliated Engineers -> (URL) Page -> (URL) Page -> (URL) (25 years ago, 17-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Can we define flogging?
|
|
(...) Rephrased statement: There are many more types and classes of non-auction market transactions than there are types and classes of auction transactions. (...) Heh heh! And how do you define that "plus whatever" part? :-) "Hey, TRU has this set (...) (25 years ago, 17-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
