|
|
 | | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
| (...) Though this last sentenced looks quoted, I assume that you Greg "author of zany sigs :-)" Majewski wrote it. I'm not frustrated like a lot of folks (for obvious reasons) but where the future of an individual with regard to a community is at (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
| 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 (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
| (...) Wow, you must be REALLY frustrated with all this :-| (...) You're missing the entire point of what 80 million people have already told you, "But it WAS posted." You are basically saying, "Well, if I hadn't have posted it, people wouldn't have (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Reverse engineering (Was: Why TLG doesn't have a leg to stand on anymore.)
|
| (...) You have (as I read the law) been allowed to do that in EU for a few years now. Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- Web...: <URL:(URL) -- ---...--- (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
| (...) The message was posted by me. my newsreader seemed to stuff it up and post to .geek as well as mailing it to tore so the message was posted by me but it should never have been so therefore it should not have been seen by people on this group. (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
| (...) According to the NNTP headers in the message, it was posted by you to lugnet.off-topic.geek on Tuesday, August 3, 1999 at 11:16:38 GMT, from studun26.murdoch.edu.au, using Netscape 4.03 for Win95. Still baffled? (...) Apparently you posted it (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
| (...) Tore (...) Agreed to all of Eric's above points. (...) Going solely by what Tore posted, no, he was not rude. Mercy triumphs over justice (but each has its place), so let's take these following points one at a time, not as a convoluted lump, (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray?
|
| (...) Both l2p and l3p have their advantages depending on the goal of the user. l3p is great if you want a rendered version of a model, no matter the parts. l2p is great if you want a more detailed/smooth render and the parts are available. Thanks (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
| (...) No no no my friend. You cannot say in the least that your post was not rude or that it was cancelled out in effect by Tore's kind reply. Just because Tore himself didn't react at you doesn't mean it was rude. Posting mishaps happen, and (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | I apologize
|
| I apologize to everyone I have annoyed, flamed, pissed off or offended. I am sorry for saying things like: Where can I get xyz Can someone please make me xyz How do i make xyz Has anyone made xyz I need xyz Here is my attempt at xyz, is there (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
|
