 | | Re: LUGNET Posting Policy Update
|
|
(...) The ability to give time outs has been there (and has been used, in rare cases) for a long time. What has changed is the process for doing so and who is authorised to do it. (20 years ago, 28-Dec-04, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Posting Policy Update
|
|
Finally! Good move. Should've been done long ago. Hopefully this will restore civility to LUGNET. (20 years ago, 28-Dec-04, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | LUGNET Posting Policy Update
|
|
LUGNET administration has always had the ability to temporarily or permanently suspend the posting privileges of a user or member. In the past this has been only very rarely used. The mechanism for doing so was such that only Todd (or for a time, (...) (20 years ago, 28-Dec-04, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.announce, lugnet.general, FTX) !!
|
| |
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
(...) Ahh, but Leonard - you missed the point. I never said it did not belong on Lugnet, and I never said it did not belong in .people - did I? (...) I think you are also missing the entire point of Lugnet and posting messages to Lugnet -- Lugnet it (...) (20 years ago, 27-Sep-04, to lugnet.people.singles, lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
(...) Ahh, but Mark.. you missed the charter of lugnet.people: "lugnet.people– All about LEGO® people (enthusiasts, fans, maniacs, collectors, builders, etc.)" And since Todd is clearly a "LEGO people" - any post about Todd should be on-topic for (...) (20 years ago, 26-Sep-04, to lugnet.people.singles, lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: SWM AFOL in Boston seeking SF
|
|
(...) Todd, As much as I wish you luck on your search - can you explain why this does not belong in off-topic? I draw your attention to the group charter of off-topic: "Off-topic (non-LEGO®) discussions" - this is what your post was, non-LEGO® (...) (20 years ago, 26-Sep-04, to lugnet.people.singles, lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Profanity again
|
|
(...) Perhaps we could have implictly undestord code word substitutes for certain rude words. For example blasphous exclaimations could be replaced by "MegaBlok" and of couese, the word in question by "bley" (also a four letters) or the alternative (...) (20 years ago, 13-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Profanity again
|
|
(...) LOL Fat chance with Richard hopping about. ROSCO (20 years ago, 9-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Profanity again
|
|
In lugnet.admin.terms, Larry Pieniazek wrote: <snip> (...) Rats! I was just nuking the popcorn and getting comfy in my Laz-E-boy, preparing myself for the 'entertaining posts' to come... ;p Admins, you're doing a bang-up job. Thankfully, from what (...) (20 years ago, 9-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Profanity again
|
|
(...) Not *that* passionate, in my view and in the view of the other admins as stated here: (URL) I'm not advocating usage of profanity in (...) Dave subsequently requested a cancel of the post, and reposted without the profanity. As for John's use (...) (20 years ago, 9-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Profanity again
|
|
(...) And whereas I'd agree on a moral ground, having been a person who doesn't like to use profanity in everyday discourse, I do think that things said in o.t-d can get a little passionate. I'm not advocating usage of profanity in every post, but, (...) (20 years ago, 9-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Profanity again
|
|
Looks like the problem has returned: (URL) Dave! could have made this comment in a more appropriate manner. Besides, John could have meant "frick'n" instead of the other f-word. Adr. (20 years ago, 9-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | profanity
|
|
(...) I can live without the profanity. Scott A (20 years ago, 17-Aug-04, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Brad Ventura goes to Brickfest
|
|
(...) (URL) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Brad Ventura goes to Brickfest
|
|
(...) I don't nkow how to change it, that's why I didn't. If you could tell me how... (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Tente-a-plenty!
|
|
(...) I fully agree with Dave!. Keep all the clone info inside OT.Clones rather than holding too strict to the TOS and making things un-smooth. If it's that bad to post a non-market group (hey, it's worked just fine for ages!), then why not create a (...) (20 years ago, 25-Jun-04, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Tente-a-plenty!
|
|
(...) It's certainly something that can be discussed. The Lugnet transition team will be exploring this issue some. Todd and Suzanne had expressed a desire for all market posting to occur in the lugnet.market hierarchy, but there has long been (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tente-a-plenty!
|
|
(...) I know that this is correct by the letter of the TOS, but can we put it to a vote, at least? I think both purists and clone-fans alike would be well served to allow clone auction info in OT.Clones, rather than letting them get lost in the (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tente-a-plenty!
|
|
(...) Please confine auction announcements to lugnet.market.auction per (URL) the Terms of Use> (See Discussion Group Terms and Conditions item #11). Auctions of clone brand products are allowed in lugnet.market.auction so long as they are (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: What about the first?
|
|
(...) I agree. But under the circumstances what else could I do? Scott A (20 years ago, 28-May-04, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
