|
|
 | | Re: Murfle?
|
| [snip] Thanks for the positive feedback, Janey. -Suz (18 years ago, 4-Apr-06, to lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Murfle?
|
| (...) It's as the others in this thread said. The "murfling" was done in the past. It's not something being done on posts right now. If it were to be adopted, I'm sure users would be notified. I don't know why they were not before the act was (...) (18 years ago, 1-Apr-06, to lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Murfle?
|
| (...) Many parts snipped out, just to shorten things up. You made some great points and reminded my why I continue to return to Lugnet, and thank you for taking the time to respond so throughly. (...) Yes, totally. Both of those issues concern me a (...) (18 years ago, 31-Mar-06, to lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Murfle?
|
| (...) quick answers: (...) no. (...) not yet. (...) no. At least, not a different one. 'updating' would probably be good though. (...) completely understandable. I agree. (...) is it the lack of clarity then? potential for abuse? ..? (...) I (...) (18 years ago, 31-Mar-06, to lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: IRON MECHA - The Qwelder Mech - FOR SALE
|
| (...) I really can't see why this is so difficult to understand, Eric. No-one had a problem with it when you first released it because it came under 'fair use' and you weren't trying to make money out of it. It wasn't a coincidence that concerns (...) (18 years ago, 31-Mar-06, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
|
