 | | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Linking to LUGNET image files?
|
|
G'day Suzanne & Todd, This has probably been asked a million times. I couldn't find any info in the T.O.S. about it. Anyhow, is it okay to link to images on LUGNET, specifically from the sets database, on another website? At present this would be (...) (24 years ago, 17-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | John -- please reply (was: Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego)
|
|
(...) John, I tried writing you a reply by e-mail and it bounced: ===...=== ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- <ig88888888@stlnet.com> ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to mail.postnet.com.: (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: straying off-topic & marmites (was: Re: the best laid plans of mice and men)
|
|
(...) These things always seem to blow up when someone exercises "vigilante justice" (I haven't followed through 100% of this particular instance to say that this one is a case of "vigilante justice" but I'm speaking from a general viewpoint). What (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: straying off-topic & marmites (was: Re: the best laid plans of mice and men)
|
|
(...) I did not mean ridicule anyone or anything. I feel like ridiculing someone right now, but I am too busy... Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: straying off-topic & marmites (was: Re: the best laid plans of mice and men)
|
|
(...) This is a key point - I think Todd covered it. Rules do exist, and they should be respected. However, enforcing them in a "jobs worth" manner just alienates everyone. If we all sifted through each and every post and winged about infractions at (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: straying off-topic & marmites (was: Re: the best laid plans of mice and men)
|
|
Lorbaat wrote: ..... (...) Is there any possibility that the complaint, or the system itself are somehow ridiculous at least a bit (especially when stretched)? Selçuk (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: straying off-topic & marmites (was: Re: the best laid plans of mice and men)
|
|
(...) Eh. I don't know how clearly this came through in my original post, but I really don't think what Scott posted was off-topic enough or sustained enough to complain about. My main point was merely that his reaction was fairly typical of any (...) (24 years ago, 14-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | straying off-topic & marmites (was: Re: the best laid plans of mice and men)
|
|
(...) I don't think Scott named anyone in particular in connection with that label. He may even have been referring to a brief mail that I sent him. (...) I think this is best dropped. I don't think Scott broke any of the T&C, either. The closest (...) (24 years ago, 14-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Want to get free stuff? Electronics, Computers, Software?
|
|
Please don't post this kind of off-topic commercial junk on Lugnet. This goes for Joseph Myers (who posted the same thing on saturday (URL)) too. Not only is it against the terms of service, it's very rude. (...) [url removed] (...) (24 years ago, 29-Aug-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) I just read the message of Brad Justus and he wrote: "UK, Ireland, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark, Sweden, and Austria.". Probably I talked too much as usual and the colon was right... Ciao. Marco. (24 years ago, 25-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) OK, the "o" has been removed. And I also removed your name from the translators list based on what you said in the other message you just recently posted. I think Mario gave a chunk of text for one or two of the paragraphs. Ciao Todd (24 years ago, 25-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) Todd, well... you guessed wrong, the second one is "così come" without both accent and apostrophe. Ciao. Marco. P.S. Just to continue "to split hairs"... isn't it better to remove the "," before ", and Marco Beri". Ok, ok... someone will say (...) (24 years ago, 25-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) Todd, it's ok! It seems that Sergio arrived first as translator, isn't it? Ciao. Marco. P.S. I found just a mistake: in "NON inviare o un messaggio troppe volte" you had to remove the single "o". It's like the English "or" and if you remove (...) (24 years ago, 25-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) OK. Thanks! --Todd (24 years ago, 25-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) The Murphy's laws are right, as usual ... 8-)))) Doesn't matter what is, but a guess is *always* wrong 8-)))) CiaoCiaoSergio (24 years ago, 25-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) Bad guess :-) The former is now fine, but the latter was correct in the first version. It should remain: -> Tutti questi documenti e immagini relative sono fornite così come sono, Ciao Giulio (24 years ago, 25-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) OK, that's fixed. Should it be changed in both places? There was: viene fornito come un sistema di "salvataggio e inoltro" "così comè" and Tutti questi documenti e immagini relative sono fornite così come sono, I took a chance and changed them (...) (24 years ago, 25-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) posted, (...) the (...) It looks great ..... Just two more things: 1) in the double-to-single byte conversion, your editor lost a character: "così comè" should be "così com'è", with the apostrophe character AND the accent on the "e"; 2) The (...) (24 years ago, 25-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) OK, I removed "riinviare" and applied the other corrections that Marco posted, and made the double-byte characters into single-byte characters. Here is the result: (2 URLs) does it look? Ciao Todd (24 years ago, 25-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
(...) Very close, which is close enough. As you say, it's the gray areas that are hard, and sometimes there is no course of action from "here" to "there" that is perfect and doesn't step on SOMEONE's toes. ++Lar (...) That disclaimer applies to me (...) (24 years ago, 22-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
(...) In 99% of cases, I'm sure I have a very good idea. But the 1% left over is gray because it basically says, "don't break the law" (i.e., local laws or whatever laws may apply in whatever circumstance is in question) and "the law" is something (...) (24 years ago, 21-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
(...) Sorry Todd, but I think I'm really missing something. I thought we are not talking about The Law, but The T&C. It is a written document authored by you. So I think that you must have some idea about whether something is against that written (...) (24 years ago, 21-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
(...) Most things, not all things. Not gray-area things. (...) If in doubt, in gray-area cases like bleeding-edge Intellectual Property law, consult an attorney, is about all I can say. --Todd (24 years ago, 21-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
(...) Todd, are you sure that "you can't advise us whether something violates T&C or not"? T&C are your own rules, right? If you can't advise about it, who can advise? Selçuk (24 years ago, 21-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Sets Auction (Last Day - NOT eBay)
|
|
(...) Uhh, when you update bids again, please don't clutter the .castle group with auction noise. Reminder: the .market.auction group is the place for auctions, not the themed discussion groups. Please re-read the Discussion Group Terms and (...) (24 years ago, 20-Aug-00, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.market.auction, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) Uh ... er.... but both are understandable by a "standard" italian person with the right meaning ..... that's not "rinviare" 8-)))) (...) Yes .... I agree .... Todd, the word "riinviare" should be simply removed. (...) Usually, a great waste of (...) (24 years ago, 19-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
(...) required (...) world (...) ---you may not think that removal is needed, I have removed the list I had posted of prices/sets/descript...s/lego#'s. So, there is nothing offensive/illegal still at that link. James (24 years ago, 19-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
I'd suggest you check out the EFF (eff.org) and the ruling on DMCA, if required consider this my permission to remove posts with links. The internet just got a _lot_ colder. America is now trying to rule the world by lawyers... LS James Powell (24 years ago, 19-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
(...) I would argue that their NON-action as to stating their intent/response/feelings on the 2001 set info would make them lose their right to say SPIT about it anymore. They've had PLENTY of time to respond, and if their lawyers can't draft (...) (24 years ago, 19-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
(...) I said that, yes. But you're still misunderstanding what I said. I would recommend that you print it out on paper and sit down and talk about it with a parent or guardian or attorney. (...) No, you can't assume that just because I haven't said (...) (24 years ago, 19-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) Sergio, I know what you mean but nor "reinviare" neither "riinviare" are italian words. In the context probably it's enough to say just "inviare", there is already "troppe volte" to mean repeatedly. Ciao. Marco. P.S. I know, in Italy we call (...) (24 years ago, 18-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) None. This should be "ri-inviare" or "reinviare" .... not "rinviare" .... Marco, its meaning is "to send another copy of the same thing", not "to delay something" 8-)))) The others are fine. Well ... my keyboard is simply too slow for my (...) (24 years ago, 17-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) Here are some typos (at left side there is the mistake) : copire => copiare discussione groups => discussione testuali,come => testuali, come riinviare => rinviare qualunuque => qualunque perte => parte sappresentano => rappresentano (...) (24 years ago, 16-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) No, what you're free to do is use some common sense and accept the consequences of your actions, should there be any. I personally don't care what you (or anyone else) posts or doesn't post with regards to this or similar "pre-public" info. I (...) (24 years ago, 14-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) stand (...) OK, am I to assume then that _anything_ I read on the web is fair game? I'm going to need a 2nd Geocities account then!---to put stuff like this up on, and link to. (and await nasty legal threatening letters from) (URL) (24 years ago, 14-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Give it up - probably won't happen. Why should they do it anyway? If they define a policy to be [---] then they might somehow be bound to that, if for no other reason than PR. If they choose to simply remain silent, which is certainly their (...) (24 years ago, 14-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) (URL) it is... I asked someone of ItLug to check it for typos or other errors, but it should be fine. The standard disclaimer is needed, anyway: IANAL. I think that the legal meaning of the translated agreement is like that of the english one, (...) (24 years ago, 13-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Yes, but they could have posted the "request" or "Order" (depending on view) to .Lego.direct. (the one that was sent to Todd that caused him to withdraw the posts from pubilc display) That is what I was meaning. I would hope LSI will put (...) (24 years ago, 13-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:Fz2vn5.II9@lugnet.com... (...) you (...) community-driven (...) a (...) of (...) on (...) it (...) hanging on (...) at (...) on (...) loading (...) and (...) was (...) manner (...) (...) (24 years ago, 11-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Give them time. Brad said they are doing an investigation into the incident and will post about it when they have more facts. --Todd (24 years ago, 11-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
James Powell <wx732@freenet.victoria.bc.ca> wrote: [stuff i've snipped] [then from larry:] (...) [james' comments on napster snipped] Copyright law is very different from that for trade secrets. This discussion should go to .off-topic.debate -- it's (...) (24 years ago, 11-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Was it? LSI has _NOT_ opted to publicly post what they privately E-mailed to Todd on this issue. So, we are into the land of speculation as to if LSI considered it proprietary. (...) _big_ paintbrush here Lar. What about:hmm, my organ albums? (...) (24 years ago, 11-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Thanks for digging harder than I did, and... you sir, are a gentleman, I appreciate the retraction. Look on the bright side, the base fine appears to be capped at 5e6. Now if we're talking Lira I can cover that. :-) (...) Ya, it is a detriment (...) (24 years ago, 11-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) I apologize. My statement is true for copyright law (with which I am much more familiar), but apparently not so for trade secrets. (This is where all of those I Am Not A Lawyer disclaimers come in.) (URL) However, I also find it interesting (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Feel free to provide a cite. I don't have a Lexis ID but the 10 minutes I spent on altavista looking mostly bolstered the opposite view. That's not a definitive proof, mind you, as people are sloppy with words all the time. Till then, and (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) For that matter, so are the borders of most any subset of Intellectual Property Law today... --Todd (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) That I do understand. I now await the letter/E-mail asking me to cease and decease. James (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) hehehe! (good one Todd!) (...) OK, then here goes. (URL)I have to point out here that "fact" is in direct conflict with the "O" in (...) point taken. (...) No. In my line of work (Military), anything that is _NOT_ classified is free for (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Of course, the issue of posting a link to something is very different from the issue of hosting/publishing that something. (...) Actually, I don't mean to misquote Lar...he said something about a package and a bowtie, but it wasn't about (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Put another way, to use a phrase that Matthew Miller just used, (URL) borders of trade secret law are not only fuzzy and indeterminate and case-by-case, but they are also changing every day. --Todd (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) What you can and can't do is governed by physics, I think. :) What you may and may not do is covered in the T&C of the discussion groups, part of the LUGNET Terms of Use Agreement, (URL) tries to be clear, but since life is gray (not black and (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Larry -- you use the word "steal" here, and "theft" in your subject. This frames the question in colored terms. In my understanding, violation of intellectual property rights is not theft under the law. (And is unlike material theft in several (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) OK, I am going to TRU this evening, with the list (or at least one set on it) as a private cit, and I will ask about that spicific set...and see if something comes up. This is no more than a humble guess on my part...I mean, I will ask if any (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) happen (...) what (...) I think this guidance is just plain old common sense... if the information was obtained by you in a way that the general public, acting in a lawful manner and complying with all restrictions on behaviour that are in (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Simple. Was the discussion on Lego products? Yes. Was the discussion on allegedly public info? Yes. Therefore, does it belong on LUGNET, and is it within the above and the TOS? Yes. What Jorge did was the digital eq. of looking in a catalog, (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) I have (and don't worry, I'm not likely to go postal over it!) Forgive me for asking, but I thought the _purpose_ of LUGNET was to: www.lugnet.com/admin/plan do all of the above. The limits on LUGNET are imposed by: (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Translation help wanted
|
|
(...) translation? If you don't want it to be ready "yesterday" I'll be happy to translate it (give me a day or two) ... CiaoCiaoSergio (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Okie dokie, ya, good point! Now says this: Notice: This is a historical document which outlines site philosophy, motivations, directions, intentions, and so forth. This document does not embody any rules or regulations and should not be (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Wow! I'm nitpicking but I think you may be swinging too far the other way. I would change the second sentence a bit to acknowledge that there IS some bearing and connection, this is a vision (well, not just a vision, a manifesto because it's (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) BTW, James, even without the above notice, I don't even remotely see how you or anyone could misinterpret "To help people share information about LEGO products and LEGO-related resources on the World Wide Web by setting in motion a (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) I have added a notice to the /admin/plan/ page which reads: Notice: This is a historical document which outlines site philosophy, motivations, directions, intentions, and so forth. This document does not have any bearing on or connection with (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Forgive me, that was rude. What I mean is, slow down, take a breather here. Think things through a bit more. --Todd (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) You did not say that it was in the T&C, and you did correctly identify its source. However, I did not say or imply that you thought or said or implied that it came from the T&C. What I said is that it has nothing to do with the T&C. It is not (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) UM? Where did I say it was in the T&C, I believe right above it I said _exactly_ where it came from. Is the above accurate? (I hope so), then it is part and parcel of your site mandate. Go to: www.lugnet.com/lego/...ect/?n=522 to see exactly (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) James, Above, as Mike Timm just pointed out, you quoted something which has absolutely nothing to do with the Terms and Conditions here or the Terms of Use Agreement. What you quoted was from a plan document -- a manifesto -- a public (...) (24 years ago, 9-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Translation help wanted
|
|
Hello, Italy! On the www.lugnet.com website, I would like to offer an Italian-language version of the LUGNET Terms of Use Agreement document, which currently only exists on the site in English: (2 URLs) there anyone who might volunteer to do an (...) (24 years ago, 9-Aug-00, to lugnet.loc.it, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Gotta disagree with that one. If it were companies (or individuals, for that matter) who got to decide what their own rights were, we'd all be in trouble. What if they said that "All four-digit numbers are trade secrets. Don't use them."? Of (...) (24 years ago, 9-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) No, I'm not implying that. I believe that it's possible that some things related to this might possibly potentially violate some privacy law somewhere, and I believe that it's potentially likely that some things related to this may be (...) (24 years ago, 9-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Todd: I realise that your best answer for this is the first thing you said here- that you aren't a lawyer- but are you really implying that discussing this information- in any way, in any forum- violates the law or infinges on TLC's rights? I (...) (24 years ago, 9-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Do you mean why does LUGNET have this policy/requirement as part of the T&C? Because it benefits the community more in the long run to have this requirement in place than not to have it. Or, from a site survivalist point of view, it benefits (...) (24 years ago, 9-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Actually, it is the key question in a court case ongoing in NYC right now...Is a link to a site that contains something illegal if a cease and decease order has been granted? I am refering to DeCSS, and www.2600.com, it makes for interesting (...) (24 years ago, 9-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) That's a question for Brad or LEGO Legal via Brad. I am not a lawyer, so I can't give you legal advice on how not to break the law or how to avoid infringing on the LEGO company's rights. The policy is: Don't infringe on anyone's privacy or (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Is that your policy Todd? Can I talk all of the about the sets that I know about? If we find out about leaked information (from some other site for example), can we talk about that information in other casual conversations on Lugnet? Ben (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Rare items, only 2 days to go...
|
|
(...) Reminder: Don't post auction announcements or updates to .buy-sell-trade -- that's what the .auction newsgroup is for. Please re-read: (URL) (24 years ago, 2-Aug-00, to lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, lugnet.market.auction, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Custom Star Wars LEGO FS
|
|
(...) Kyle, Please take a few moments to review the LUGNET Terms of Use Agreement, (URL) you agreed to when you signed up. Specifically, please note that it is not OK to post auction announcements to discussion groups which do not explicitly welcome (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jul-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) That's the point I think. Selçuk (24 years ago, 17-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) Might not be important, but it might be interesting. After all, part of having a community is meeting people, right? (24 years ago, 17-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) That's ridiculous. It's not like that at all. It's like meeting someone you don't know at a lego convention, and they give you their card. I've done that. It's got my name and e-mail address on it, it's small, it's convenient, it's an accepted (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) Marc, I don't understand. Should people be ashamed of where they work or what they do? (24 years ago, 17-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) He he! Good one! (...) Why? All quotes or just silly ones? :-) (I trimmed everything except debate from the followups, which I recommend to everyone involved in this to emulate) A good thought provoking quote is a good thing. It's when they (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) Yeah, seems like a fairly simple case of a personal dislike, motivated by I don't know what, but not really important to me. I use the web interface now as well, but if I ever switch back to a news reader I'll have my sig pre-defined for every (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) As an example, section five of the Discussion Group Terms and Conditions states that you won't post defamatory or profane (among other things) messages. If you look at the snippets from your note above, you may find three breaches of this (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) 1. As long as a signature is short (four lines or under is best), it doesn't really matter what the content is, as long as it's not offensive in a way that violates the charter of the newsgroup you are posting to. 2. It may not be important (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) I didn't miss it at all. That's what my reply to you was about. I then went on to state another, related point: I believe that short .sigs (regardless of content) are much less annoying than long ones. (...) Even if it's not (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
I really thought about posting a reply earlier, but I decided against it. Here's goes second round. Marc, the problem is your own, over something, that is it really does bother you as much as you say it does, can be simply overlooked by not reading (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) I already said that I really doubt Lugnet would agree with me enough to do anything about it. (...) You're missing my point. I mentioned the part of signature files that really are uneccesary --- posting your job title and position. signature (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) I generally agree with Marc on this one. I don't think there's anything LUGNet can or should do to ban or even discourage this kind of thing, and as freedom of speech has already been mentioned in others' replies, I won't rehash that reasoning (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
This is just petty, IMO. Who really cares? (Besides you, obviously.) So it is another 4 lines on a message, JUST SKIP IT! Here is a quote for you: "Love it or leave it." And as far as the bandwith argument goes - God forbid that each message be one (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) I've read your post a couple of times, and I am frankly baffled. Why does this annoy you so much? It's a couple of lines at the end of a post that are incredibly easy to ignore. (...) Some people post to more places than LUGNET. They may not (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) Well, I use the web interface so currently (unless I get off my duff and find a macro solution) my sig is whatever I feel like typing by hand. But when I was posting via Netscape news, my sig was what I had configured it to be. Since I posted (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) While I don't include my position in posts from work, I do make it clear when I am posting from work. This is because I have my Netscape at work set up with my home e-mail identity, but I don't want to hide the fact that the post is (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) if you've got a proper newsreader, you ought to be able to turn off the display of signatures, assuming people use the proper dash dash space ("-- ") delimiter. that should prevent your being annoyed. (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) Points well taken Richard. There are several ways of looking at my comments. Here is a recent direct email I received from this post and my reply to this poor Canadian: ##### Dave Hylands wrote (me directly): Hi, Marc Cook wrote: > What I (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: This will get someone upset...
|
|
(...) I don't disagree with you, but at the same time I think that people should be allowed to have whatever signature they want. I see it as a form of freedom of expression. I wouldn't want to stop people from posting with their chosen signatures (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | This will get someone upset...
|
|
I've noticed a few people like posting their signature files on Lugnet or a "signature" like saluation. I think degree posting a quote, or a link to your lego pages is fine. What I really see as bragging and I feel is really annoying is posting your (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: Quick Set
|
|
(...) Yes, absolutely, it would be fine if you did that. --Todd (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Quick Set
|
|
Would it be okay to link to the Quick Set main page from one's personal website? (If this belongs in another group please redirect me) Greg Majewski (URL) (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: 2 x Armada Flagship = Armada Warship
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.geek, Frank Filz writes: <snip> Remember, trim geek unless you were commenting on signature doohickies! ++Lar (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
