To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.termsOpen lugnet.admin.terms in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / Terms of Use / 509
508  |  510
Subject: 
Re: LUGNET Posting Policy Update
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.admin.terms
Date: 
Tue, 11 Jan 2005 03:17:34 GMT
Reply-To: 
cjmasi@*nogarbageplease*rcnSAYNOTOSPAM.com
Viewed: 
7967 times
  
Frank Filz wrote:
Christopher Masi wrote:

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
ramble if they are not offending anyone? (Pleaes cc to my e-mail
since I
do not follow lugnet.admin.terms.) All of the other reasons seem like
such good reasons for suspending access that this one falls just a
bit flat.


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 by and check for responses...

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 around to different groups. I might be
mistaken, but I didn't part of this thread break off into
lugnet.admin.general? Then again, I also use my knife as a backstop for
my peas.

The problem with just ignoring people who won't let go is that there is
always someone new who responds and triggers another beating of the dead
horse. Now I suppose there might be something to be said for punnishing
those who don't read several posts in a thread before responding (so that
they see the "this horse is dead, please stop beating it" post from an
admin), but the real culprit is the person who just can't let go.

Again, I have to wonder so what? Beat the dead horse. If I find the
thread that annoying I could just filter it. Is an undying thread more a
problem when using the web interface, where an an undying thread keeps
taking up space and cannot be filtered?

[snip]


Frank



Again, I was just thought that someone who doesn't know when to stop
talking (me right now for example) doesn't seem to be in the same league
as someone who is abusive and profane.

Chris



Message has 1 Reply:
  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 (...) (19 years ago, 11-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)

Message is in Reply To:
  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 (...) (19 years ago, 10-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.terms)

48 Messages in This Thread:





















Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR