| |
That sounds like a good idea because:
1) Jonathan is Jonathan. No matter how hard he tries, he will not be
able to function in a mature manner in LUGNET because *HE IS IMMATURE*
That's no crime, he's just young. And a little dense. But who among us
is perfect? (Okay, besides Lar;)
2) It will take care of the voluminous white JW noise which is prolly
the most annoying thing about him.
3) It won't cut him off completely, and therefore possibly stifling his
own creativity.
Since it may be technically a problem to limit him to two messages per
day, a better idea might be to have him self impose a 2 post limit--
with the understanding that if he violates that agreement he will
automatically loose privileges immediately for a month or whatever, end
of discussion. It would also make a nasty "vote" thing unnecessary.
Give him the rope; let him hang *himself*
-John
Scott R Dennett wrote:
> I like this idea, but maybe two messages, one in the morning one
> in the
> evening. This way it makes it easier, because you can reply to
> things
> that came in during the night, and then to things that came in
> during
> the day.
> I think we ought to hold off on revoking the posting privilages,
> at least for
> now, because he has said that he will change his ways, so I
> think we should
> at least give him some time to see if he lives up to it.
>
> Ryan
>
> "Ultimately, my goal is to glorify God." Brock Huard
>
> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
>
> On 8/17/1999, at 11:37 AM, John VanZwieten wrote:
>
> > How about a 1 post per day limit to the cad.* heirarchy as a • probationary
> > condition? This would force Jonathan to more carefully • consider what he posts,
> > and would give everyone a break from the deluge of sometimes • rude or irritating
> > posts.
> >
> > Is this technically feasable, Todd?
> >
> > -John Van
> >
> >
> > Adam Howard <abhoward10@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:FGL28s.CD0@lugnet.com...
> > > Followup-To: lugnet.admin.general
> > >
> > >
> > > This is a Call For Votes (CFV)
> > >
> > > After much discussion it has been decided that an open public • vote needs to
> > > be made about this situation. The vote is at the end of this • message.
> > > Please read the Problem Summary and Defense before voting.
> > >
> > >
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
| I don't read most of the newsgroups that have complained, and so I don't feel it is my place to vote in the matter. However, as a suggestion, perhaps it would be more feasible to ban him from Lugnet and then see if he _VOLUNTARILY_ cleans up his (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
| (...) Thanks for noticing, and thanks for the braces, which arrived today. I MEANT to leave them at your house, it wasn't an accident. All part of the master plan. Macaroni is staged for shipment. Also thanks for proving your imperfection by posting (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
101 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
