 | | Re: auction vs non-auction double standard?
|
|
(...) I think there is, and I chose that word/phrase because I thought it would indicate that it is a potentially charged issue. People are forbidden to post auctions to any group but .market.auction. People can post "I'm selling this ..." messages (...) (24 years ago, 12-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms) !
|
| |
| | Re: auction vs non-auction double standard?
|
|
<snipped much text that I completely agree with> (...) Precisely. I dislike seeing b-s-t posts in theme-NGs just as much as I dislike auction posts (1). I'd be happy to add anything, but Mike said it all. -Shiri (1) I do not completely dislike them, (...) (24 years ago, 12-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: auction vs non-auction double standard?
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) traffic (...) exist, (...) to (...) I think there is a "double standard" in that auction posts are singled out as particularly bad. This is not necessarily a bad thing (we also have a "double standard" on (...) (24 years ago, 12-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: C'mon already...
|
|
(...) no... (...) yes. (URL) I request that the ban be lifted. Not because I have anything to say in that (...) The block is now removed. --Todd (24 years ago, 12-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | C'mon already...
|
|
Todd: Don't you think that my continuing to be banned from "Dear-Lego" is sort of overkill? I did already ask to have my full lugnet posting privileges reinstated, but perhaps you did not notice...wasn't the ban to be lifted upon my request? I (...) (24 years ago, 11-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Reminder: auction announcements in .market.auction only
|
|
Sorry. :-) "Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com> ha scritto nel messaggio news:Fsv926.EE4@lugnet.com... (...) explicitly (...) (24 years ago, 11-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: auction vs non-auction double standard?
|
|
guito <guito@guito.dhs.org> wrote in message news:slrn8f6lu7.ebp....ome.com... (...) solicitations. (...) As of _now_ there have been 102 posts to .auction and 103 to .bst in the last 7 days. If you add to that the trade posts dotted around all the (...) (24 years ago, 11-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: auction vs non-auction double standard?
|
|
(...) I disagree that there is a "double-standard" (but that's just wording), but I agree that it would go a long way toward eliminating gray areas -- if the boundaries could be defined clearly (which I'm very skeptical of). Some things to figure (...) (24 years ago, 11-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms) !
|
| |
| | Reminder: auction announcements in .market.auction only
|
|
(...) Reminder: Auction announcements should go only into groups which explicitly allow for them in their charters (currently only .market.auction). (URL) (24 years ago, 11-Apr-00, to lugnet.market.shopping, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: auction vs non-auction double standard?
|
|
(...) Auctions create a lot more traffic than regular sales. At least thats what I've always thought was the reason (it's the reason why I don't read RTL anymore, anyway). They clutter up a newsgroup. Maybe Todd feels the same way? (24 years ago, 11-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: auction vs non-auction double standard?
|
|
(...) <snipped bits> (...) I generally try to avoid "me too" posts, but wanted to do so here, and add some reasoning. I agree with Mike. My personal preference is to not see any market traffic unless I go looking for it.(1) Also, if the double (...) (24 years ago, 11-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | auction vs non-auction double standard?
|
|
(...) messages (...) aren't (...) I keep being amused in a confused kind of way by this seeming double standard. Let me demonstrate how this bst vs auction double standard sounds to me. Some (maybe a lot, maybe just a few really "valuable") people (...) (24 years ago, 11-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms) !
|
| |
| | Re: FT: King's Castle 6080
|
|
(...) Right, sorry. -Shiri (24 years ago, 11-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: FT: King's Castle 6080
|
|
(...) That's not actually true. Only auctions are verboten outside of the .market .auction group by the Terms of Use Agreement. Non-auction solicitations aren't strictly verboten by the Agreement, but generally they're frowned upon by most people. (...) (24 years ago, 11-Apr-00, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Horizontal scrolling while posting? (was: Re: whoop de doo)
|
|
(...) Hmm, that sounds very odd. What screen resolution do you run at (640x480?) and what font size do you use (higher than 12 pt?)? --Todd (24 years ago, 8-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: whoop de doo
|
|
(...) Good. All understood and completely clear in my mind. Now I simply have to adjust my lugnet HTTP viewing habits away from the nested/compact thread display view to the linear/all thread view. Now, if I could just figure out how to adjust the (...) (24 years ago, 8-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: whoop de doo
|
|
(...) d'OH!!! My bad! Now I see what was causing you the confusion! The "compact" and "brief" thread views aren't supposed to have the "Submit Ratings" button on them. The thread display routine doesn't currently check what display mode it's (...) (24 years ago, 8-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: whoop de doo
|
|
(...) Okay, my problem is not me and it is not a browser problem (Netscape v4.51). The problem is that I have been using (for months) the nested/compact thread display. I guess to make this Submit All rating feature work, I need to switch to the (...) (24 years ago, 8-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: whoop de doo
|
|
(...) nono -- it's not useless at all -- what the button simply means is "apply all of the radio button selections currently visible on this HTML page." (...) You -can- rate messages one at a time, but it's not required, no. (...) It can be used for (...) (24 years ago, 7-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
