To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.termsOpen lugnet.admin.terms in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / Terms of Use / *255 (-10)
  Re: Let’s be inclusive, and not exclusive. (was Re: My point.)
 
(...) I had a look at the feedback page: (URL) Questions: 1. Does one have to read the terms / agree to the terms / be a member / to post feedback? 2. Does line "here is your chance to share some thoughts privately" at least imply the communication (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Spam alert!
 
(...) my (...) while (...) Unfortunately, such people are unlikely to take any notice of such conditions. And any legal action against them is probably doomed to failure, and will certainly be expensive. The best two solutions are probably: 1. Never (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.org.au, lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Spam alert!
 
(...) That's pretty sick. Is there any way Todd could add a terms of use for the LUGNET website for everyone -- members, non-members who post, and people who neither post nor are members?? That way he could legally forbid email address harvesting (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.org.au, lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
 
(...) I just noticed that - and I do recall seeing him posting for at least a few weeks here. He's been very respectful up until now, even on things that he has attacked the most today. Strange. ...perhaps he didn't fill a perscription or something (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
 
(...) into (...) <insert voice of moderation> Well, Matthew Moulton has been, IMO and in the apparant majority of opinions, a jerk today. *BUT* If you search back, you'll notice that he's been an infrequent, generally reasonable poster for upwards (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Was M*ndroid ToSsable from Lugnet? When?
 
(...) M*ndroid was probably a much clearer case. Matthew Moulton's case is a lot fuzzier, I think. Maybe tomorrow he wakes up and realizes he was having a bad day, and grows up, and apologizes, and stops posting off-topic in .space. Or maybe not. I (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Was M*ndroid ToSsable from Lugnet? When?
 
I came on the LEGO scene too late to "enjoy" (sic) the subject contributor's "contributions" (sic) to RTL. My question is this, to people that remember his posts, were they, in and of themselves, sufficient to get him ToSsed from Lugnet, were he to (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: skip filter settings?
 
(...) that (...) Me too. (URL) Todd has indicated it would be some rather tricky coding. Just ToS him... ++Lar (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: skip filter settings?
 
(...) A lovely and elegant idea. I hope it can be done. JohnG, GMLTC LUGNET member #38 (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...
 
(...) Given this bit of (rather unsurprising) information, is there any chance of enforcing something in the ToS to make this person go away? If not, is there any chance of adding something to the ToS to make it easier to make people like this go (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.admin.terms)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR