 | | Re: "Some pigs are more equal than other pigs"
|
|
(...) Sorry but being an administrator means you should be a step above the crowd in terms of you behavior. Just be cause you are taking the moment off doesn’t mean the standards should be lowered. To (Loosely) quote the Policy update “They are not (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: "Some pigs are more equal than other pigs"
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Ken Nagel wrote: <snip> (...) Whereas I think I can see both sides of this issue, 1- Larry wasn't posting as an admon, he was posting as a user of LUGNET, justlike the rest of us, and 2- by the very fact that he mentioned o.t.fun (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org.niltc, lugnet.org.us.clb, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | "Some pigs are more equal than other pigs"
|
|
On Tuesday the 18th I extended a simple invitation for people to Visit NILTC’s next show: (URL) was responded to by Larry Pieniazek, The curator for lugnet.trains thus: (URL) copy came from the library who is very excited about this show. I would (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org.niltc, lugnet.org.us.clb, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms) !
|
| |
| | Re: who does chris think he is?
|
|
(...) This sort of highlights something that I wonder about. Are smaller, out-of-the way groups more suitable for otherwise questionable behavior? With things like off-topic.debate, it's skipped by default, so there's less chance that (say) a kid (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Posting Policy Update
|
|
In lugnet.admin.terms, Frank Filz wrote: <snip> (...) No! There's no one here like that!! We're all one big happy family! ;) Dave K (20 years ago, 11-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Posting Policy Update
|
|
"Christopher Masi" <cjmasi@*nogarbagepl...e*rcn.com> wrote in message news:IA4uH8.I2t@lugnet.com... (...) A few points: First, by that logic, the announcement groups should be open to discussion. Also, people should feel free to conduct all the (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Posting Policy Update
|
|
(...) Yes, I understand that, and I am probably alone in my opinion, but I think that if an initial post is important enough to be placed in a given group, then the thread should live in that group. I am not a fan of having to chase discussions (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Posting Policy Update
|
|
(...) Sorry that you don't follow lugnet.admin.terms. It's generally considered bad ettiquette to post to someplace and ask for an e-mail response because you don't read that forum... Perhaps someone else will forward this to you if you don't stop (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Posting Policy Update
|
|
Kelly J. McKiernan wrote: [snip] (...) Is the following reason, really a good reason for discontinuing sn individual's access? I would have thought that the best way to stop "a should be dead thread" is by not responding to it. Why not let people (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Posting Policy Update
|
|
(...) snipped the state I am in (...) And to you. (...) Np, just looking for clarity. (...) Yes, I fully understand that wishful thinking, but considering I'm here posting while fully loaded on New Years, and to quote Mick "You can't always get what (...) (20 years ago, 1-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
