 | | Brain Damage
|
|
(...) AND (...) AND (...) Careful with that axe, Eugene. Money Eclipse Wish You Were Here UmmaGumma Time? Shine On You Crazy Diamond "The Lunatic is on the grass"? "And when the cloudbursts thunder in your ear You shout and no-one seems to hear And (...) (19 years ago, 20-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Mr. Jeeves
|
|
(...) See that would have been better. Point well taken. (...) Though I do admit sitting down to build this model with the purposes of putting it up for sale. Perhaps that was just a little to much with the post. Still I have to try to get the model (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Mr. Jeeves
|
|
(...) Good solution. JOHN (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mr. Jeeves
|
|
(...) Perhaps the best way if you want to announce a MOC and that it's for sale, is to announce the MOC in appropriate groups with no mention of the sale, then post a separate thread in .marketplace, referring to the MOC thread (or not, as you deem (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Mr. Jeeves
|
|
(...) Not at all. That you crossposted in .B-S-T is irrelevant (though that is THE appropriate place for that particular post). (...) Yeah, and that is what I meant about "clever posters". One can announce an MOC and talk about it and whatnot, and (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mr. Jeeves
|
|
In lugnet.admin.terms, John Neal wrote: I thought if I included the Marketplace/sale/trade/ newsgroup I covered myself. Perhaps if I tried to tone it down a bit and just mention the model is for sale near the end of the post? I rather not have the (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf Find, and Insulting other people's friend's
|
|
(...) Egad. (URL) Time flies> JOHN (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mr. Jeeves
|
|
(...) Perhaps a determining factor is who potentially stands to profit from the announcement-- the poster or the reader. (...) The key word is "implication". In this instance, his solicitation was in no uncertain terms-- the very reason for the (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf Find, and Insulting other people's friend's
|
|
(...) I find nothing wrong with Soren as a role model, and thank him for showing me how to make a mech. I'm well aware of the public facets of his character, and being 18, am quite self-posessed enough to choose what I allow to influence me. Do no (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf find: Hello Vifam
|
|
(...) I understand, Stefan. And I am sorry if I came down on you too hard. In light of your action, my faith in you is now restored:-) Leg Godt, JOHN (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mr. Jeeves
|
|
(...) John- Are these "for sale" posts to be forbidden too? Every time someone posts a description of a new LEGO set including its price and specifying the first day of sale and even saying where to buy it? (Hmmm, let's also eliminate those Shop @ (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf find: Hello Vifam
|
|
(...) I never said it was an excuse. I was only offering an explanation to John. -Stefan- (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf find: Hello Vifam
|
|
(...) Luckily you have left yourself the option of removing or changing the images outside of Lugnet. Not having read the TOS is not really an excuse (a reason maybe), ignorance of the law does not give you carte blanche to break it. Tim (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: (was Brickshelf find:) DON'T STEAL PEOPLE'S IMAGES
|
|
(...) Corny! You corn ball. Take the time for me, there's that axe again. Soren, buddy, pal, neighbor, peer, dude, if Stefan looks up to you, this is the time to show him the error of his way. Bafoon! Not take time to dual with your arch nemesis. (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf find: Hello Vifam
|
|
(...) Not at all. Kev moderates 1,000s of images-- things do sneak through. (...) Examples? Without disciplinary action? (...) It's not my intention to button-push, but merely to point out that vulgar language is becoming more and more commonplace, (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf find: Hello Vifam
|
|
(...) lol Okaay, wrong guy to ask:-) (...) Thanks for the offer, but that isn't really my cup of tea. (...) Well, there's a fair chance the builder doesn't even speak English... (...) Really. And what do you suppose it is? (...) Honestly, I have no (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf find: Hello Vifam
|
|
(...) Actually, they're covered under fair use. The parody/satire clause, IIRC. (...) Because I'm not interested in a shitstorm. (...) I'd laugh my ass off. Besides, I've done far (URL) worse> (warning, really messed up adult content) than that (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf find: Hello Vifam
|
|
Moving back to admin.terms since this is not an off topic debate. The images do not *clearly* violate TOS if they have been moderated. Considering the size and obviousness of the lettering, it can't be argued that the admins didn't see it, and as (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf find: Hello Vifam
|
|
(...) But aren't those types of edits the right of the creator alone? (...) Why not? (...) No "crime", but put it this way: how would you feel if somebody posted pics of their recreation of (URL) with a lewd caption on it? You might think it's (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf find: Hello Vifam
|
|
(...) From the TOS: "You agree to not use the Service to: (a) upload, post or otherwise transmit any Content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortuous, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-05, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
