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 / *375 (-20)
  Re: Unsubscribe from the LP newsletter
 
(...) If you mean this: (URL) don't think you have apologised. (...) You would have no right to do that if that situation did arise. Further, where in the ToU does it say its OK make threats here? What is one to think of you? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 24-Nov-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Apology.
 
(...) Ignore who is involved. A member has broken the rules. He is threatening to do the same again. Either he should be removed, or the rules should be changed. (...) I can't agree with you. Take a look at who continually tries, and often succeeds, (...) (23 years ago, 26-Nov-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Apology.
 
(...) Larry, by your own measure, you are a bare faced liar. Calling me a "liar" without being willing to justify it in any way does nothing but emphasis that point. You are deluded. You need help. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 26-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Apology.
 
(...) Possibly. It's a very grey area. (OBDisclaimer: I'm only really arguing this to refine my understanding of what the ToU might mean in a fairly grey area.) (...) It is unreasonable to hold Lugnet's ToU to any authority beyond Lugnet, so the (...) (23 years ago, 25-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Apology.
 
(...) I believe you are incorrect. First, if it's against the spirit of the ToU for a spammer to harvest email addresses against the will of the participants, it's against the spirit of the ToU for an UNspammer to harvest a single email address (...) (23 years ago, 25-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Apology.
 
(...) I refuse to support the banning of one member of Lugnet over a dispute with another member of Lugnet unless both parties are banned together. So I think you should be more careful of the things you are seeking to achieve because you will end (...) (23 years ago, 24-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general)  
 
  Re: Apology.
 
(...) Actually, I think you're both wrong. I just reveiwed the terms of use, and there is nothing in there about e-mail addresses, except the requirement to have a valid one in your posting ID. So if you still feel that Larry violated your privacy, (...) (23 years ago, 24-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Apology.
 
(...) Dave sums it up: (URL) did what he did *knowing* it breaks the ToU here. He did what he did *knowing* it was a violation of my privacy rights. He did what he did in his usual belligerent manner: ==+== See, I march to my own metronome, and the (...) (23 years ago, 24-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Apology.
 
My My, someone got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.... I normally stay out of debate, I don't need anymore crap in my life, though you brought this into the public forum where I do read, and of course, I had to go back and look at the (...) (23 years ago, 24-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Apology.
 
(...) Something needs to be done. All of our e-mails are displayed here based on trust. If members here feel they have the right to abuse that trust, what sort of place will this become? This person has taken my details from this forum, and used (...) (23 years ago, 24-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Unsubscribe from the LP newsletter
 
(...) Arguably it is not. I don't think it's in the letter but it violates the spirit as it's a misuse of an email address. I apologised on forum and I will apologise again here. What I did was wrong, never mind that my motive was to be helpful, and (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Unsubscribe from the LP newsletter
 
I wonder if Todd &/or Suz intend that members should use the e-mail addresses of posters in this way? I expect not. Is it even within the TofU? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Wanted of Harry Potter (Clueless!)
 
(...) We tend to post notices of retail sales in .loc.au, with trading / auctions/ etc going in .org.au (where the charter specifically allows it). (...) I agree. The theme groups should be for discussing things other than trading etc. However the (...) (23 years ago, 11-Nov-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Wanted of Harry Potter (Clueless!)
 
(...) I know that the .loc.au crowd enjoys having sale announcements in .loc.au and .org.au (the latter, especially, IIRC), so maybe a blanket restriction from the theme groups (including .general) would be called for. I honestly don't find b-s-t or (...) (23 years ago, 11-Nov-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Wanted of Harry Potter (Clueless!)
 
(...) Offhand. . .exactly two years, (URL) with perhaps increasing resolution over time. And I agree that a clarification of the TOS[1] would still be a good thing. TWS Garrison [1] Personally, I'd prefer a change to ban on all (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Wanted of Harry Potter (Clueless!)
 
(...) Could someone please point out the item in the TOS which prohibits non-auction buy/sell/trade posts out of non-market groups? As far as I'm concerned, currently, such posts are allowed. Todd had posted many times that such is allowed, though (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.harrypotter, lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: Legos role in Anti-terrorism
 
(...) I'm assuming she was pleased to hear of LEGO in a rather odd place and pleased to hear that Joseph can participate. (as are many of us I am sure (1) ) I suspect she overlooked the para you cited rather than endorsed it per se. I think your (...) (23 years ago, 4-Nov-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: I've got some imperial soldiers for sale again!
 
(...) wrto market posting had been discussed to death, but I don't remember seeing them change. I do think this is a good idea, just want to make sure the rules are crisp. Frank (23 years ago, 3-Nov-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: I miss the old LUGNET...
 
Ok, Larry you raise good points and I will keep them in mind for the future. I hope to be respectful to other groups and I will abide by the TOS in the future. Thank you for being straight up with me. I can always trust you to see it as it really (...) (23 years ago, 2-Nov-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
 
  Re: I miss the old LUGNET...
 
(...) Perhaps whoever the curator for lugnet.newbie is could go through some of the posts there and put together a faq on the topic. General netiquette is a starting point but Things Are Different Here(tm), at least a little bit. (...) I don't think (...) (23 years ago, 2-Nov-01, to lugnet.general, 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