|
|
 | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) Icky? That's a new one. Well, serves me right for trying to reply to fast. : ) How about "Is bragging offensive to some people? Yes. Does it belong on LUGNET?" Better. FUT to off.topic.fun I guess. Scott "Off to fix the webpage" S. -- Personal (...) (24 years ago, 7-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) Ooh, Scott's sentence structure there is icky. There's some double negatavism going on, but the phrase "does it not belong" is usually intended to mean the same is "is it true that it belongs"... (...) One thing I strongly suggest you also add (...) (24 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| Todd, (...) Well, that settles that. Thank you Todd for the clarification. Scott S. (24 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) For the record, I did not say that bragging didn't belong here. (...) First, I have to take it face value; I'm not a mind reader. Lar has stated several times that it was a brag and not a flog. So be it. Second, flogs in theme groups are (...) (24 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | (canceled)
|
| | | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| I watched this with some amusement, and some amazement. First, Larry is a stand up person, whom I have met, and whose creations are worth bragging about, having seen them up close. He does brag, it is part of him, but at the same time, I think he (...) (24 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Joslin writes: <snip> I said what I had to say about this. I did not intend this to be a flog. It may be perceived by some as that, but it was intended as boasting, nothing more. I tried to explain in more detail why it (...) (24 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) Actually, it was a mathamatics/logic expression before it was a programming one. You software nerds are the new kids on the block <grin> James (who will confess he's a hardware nerd - it's like a software nerd, but you don't have to wear a (...) (24 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) != == Not equal to (form "C" el al programming languages) Software nerd (remember a nerd is just a geek with a degree) (24 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) Not equal. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| Uhh - I've been seeing that != in a couple of posts. Would some tech jargon junkie remind me what it means? -- Cheers ... Geoffrey Hyde "Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:3aa4059f.183521...net.com... (...) was (...) (24 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Defining some written consequences for transgressions of T&C
|
| (...) As an evolution of the idea, how about something like an "insurance points" system where transgressions earn you points, and time takes them away. I would hate to see someone who was a real jerk as a kid make it to 4th offense, and then come (...) (24 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) <snip> I'm confused here, I sincerely meant my lead as a thank you to Rose, and I took your "I'll second that" as just that, an agreement and your own thanks as well. What am I missing here? Why would you think anyone would mistake what you (...) (24 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) (Responding to my own post.) YIKES -- it just occurred to me that what I wrote above might be mistaken as a condemnation of what Rose did. On the contrary, I actually meant it as a _complement_ to Rose. I thanked Rose this morning via private (...) (24 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Defining some written consequences for transgressions of T&C
|
| (...) I always found (when I did this for a living) that automatically suspending service for a non-response worked wonders. And that was for internet service in general. Waiting 24 hours for a response, then suspending service until a response came (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Defining some written consequences for transgressions of T&C
|
| (...) Ahh. Yes. This is for the annoying kind of stuff and the illegal really bad stuff needs that reservation...thanks. (...) I meant for that to be covered under "requiring a response of acknowledgment of receipt." I guess if someone didn't (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Defining some written consequences for transgressions of T&C
|
| (...) Yes, it's nice & clean. There's only thing I would recommend doing/adding: 1: stressing (somewhere) that these are 'typical' responses & general procedure, but that LUGNET reserves the right to bypass these guidelines in extreme cases. (If, (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Defining some written consequences for transgressions of T&C
|
| One thing that the Discussion Group Terms & Conditions here lacks is any predefined list of actions to be taken if someone commits a transgression of the T&C. Here is a proposal... This is not active site policy but instead a proposal for a future (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) agreeing that it was, in addition to being a flog, a brag. IMHO. IOW, brag + flog != flog Not that that makes it any better or worse. Just clarifying what I meant. ^^Todd (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) I suppose I wasn't totally clear in what I wrote earlier. Yes, I personally happen to feel that what (not ++, that's not part of his name)Lar wrote was a flog (IMHO), but I also added that I thought it was more brag than flog. To make an (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
|
