 | | Re: New Terms of Use for LUGNET
|
|
(...) Hi Frank, Looking at your suggestions for sales posts it seems as though MOC announcements/ad combined posts would be unallowed in most groups. Personally I would prefer that they should be allowed in the relavent announcement group provided (...) (18 years ago, 18-Sep-06, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: New Terms of Use for LUGNET
|
|
Some thoughts on the discussion group terms: #7: clarify to allow use of FTX. #9.2: I think it would be reasonable to allow auction postings in groups that specifically allow them, though it should be pointed out that set of groups would generally (...) (18 years ago, 18-Sep-06, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: New Terms of Use for LUGNET
|
|
(...) Hello Rene, The new ToU does seem more clear and concise, although there is one area that I think could use some clarification. At the bottom of the T&C block is the new (and IMO much-needed) sentence: "LUGNET reserves the right to cancel (...) (18 years ago, 18-Sep-06, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New Terms of Use for LUGNET
|
|
What effect (if any) does this change have on things like (URL) this>? Marc Nelson Jr. (URL) Marc's Creations>> (18 years ago, 18-Sep-06, to lugnet.admin.terms, FTX)
|
| |
| | New Terms of Use for LUGNET
|
|
Hi, due to the fact that this site is now subjected to German law, there are new ToU for LUGNET. NEW (URL) OLD (URL) The ToU are now more clear, changes are as follows: Changes in "OVERVIEW AND DEFINITIONS" The headline is no longer "Overview and (...) (18 years ago, 18-Sep-06, to lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.general, FTX) !!
|
| |
| | 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)
|
