 | | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | (...) Wow, you nailed it! That's the feeling I'm beginning to get after reading recent messages from PeterC, PaulB, MarkH, ScottA, and others. To posit a question, how much harm would it do if all types of market traffic were allowed in .loc and (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | Some thoughts: I don't want to see lugnet.loc.us turn into a jumble of market posts, which could happen if the default was to allow all types of market traffic in the loc groups. One way to handle it is allow the market posts in the loc groups by (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Group Charters —Susan Hoover
|
| | | | | (...) I thought your first message, which I will paraphrase as "no .market type posts at all in .loc (and other) groups", while at first sounds quite reasonable in an A-R kind of way, completely falls apart when you consider .market.shopping. Many (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Group Charters —Richard Franks
|
| | | | | | (...) In practice - the unofficial rule-change in .loc.uk allowing some .market posts through concensous, has been quite easy to remember for me - essentially because I've been a part of that group. If you have nothing to do with a locality, then (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Group Charters —Shiri Dori
|
| | | | | | | (...) Oh, dear. Of course they will - that is, if we ALLOW certain market posts in ALL of .loc.us there will be a HUGE amount of market posts. Personally, I think that market posts should be allowed in lower-level .loc groups (eg, .loc.us.ma, or (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Group Charters —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) be (...) A Detroit sale is EXTREMELY relevant to a loc.ca.on.<windsor> group, and vice versa. it seems like ALL of Windsor either works in SE michigan, works for a car company, and thus goes to SE michigan a lot on business, or just goes there (...) (24 years ago, 14-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4) —Richard Franks
|
| | | | | (...) From a technical standpoint, it is a problem. But I think from a practical POV, it might not actually be a problem - if someone contributes to any group then they should have a say, regardless of nationality. If someone wanted to try and mess (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) BTW - I was rather bemused by this: So even though Mark was "right". He was wrong to break a rule which was wrong even though in doing so he was right? Scott A A more extreme example might be someone wanting to run an auction (...) (24 years ago, 4-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4) —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | | (...) Yep. Rule of law and all that. :) (24 years ago, 4-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | (...) No, I said .loc.au was a was logical place, not that it was the right place. By "logical place" I mean that common sense might suggest that posting it there might make perfect sense (if someone was clueless about the T&C). (...) It's always (...) (24 years ago, 4-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Group Charters (was:Re: Fabuland Auction Update 4) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) Whether (...) Indeed. But the problem with devolving any sort of power to only a limited number of groups is that other groups may also want it - or assume they already have it. Scott A (24 years ago, 5-May-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | | |
