 | | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) Both, but moreso that only LSC-eligable. I'd rather the LSC be selected by people who are familiar with the other programmers and potential members, as well as the issues the LSC will be dealing with. I think this is a very important concern, (...) (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) huh. (...) you're supporting that only LSC-eligable can vote, or that the ad-hoc group can vote? I think everyone can vote - but if we say that's not so, then I think the ad-hoc part should be removed. Why the special treatment? On Mon, May (...) (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) That statement (aside from the ad-hoc addition) was in Version 0.6, the first version I posted publicly. I found it in my local text file, as well as in the post here: (URL) strongly in favor of at least restricting the vote to only those (...) (21 years ago, 5-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I don't believe the beginning part is new (eligible LSC members can vote) it is new, but I added the ad-hoc group in there for those in the ad-hoc who are ineligible for LSC membership. Track Changes didn't highlight it in Word. I am for that (...) (21 years ago, 5-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) This is new? Only the committee and people who are eligable for membership in the LSC can vote? I thought we were defining the general membership in LDraw.org so that everyone can vote? I think this paragraph should say: LDraw.org Members will (...) (21 years ago, 5-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
I think it's time to post the 0.99 draft of the LSC proposal. I've pasted it below with mo revision marks. You can see an HTML document _with_ revision marks here: (URL) think we're 99% of the way there to having a final draft - and if there are no (...) (21 years ago, 5-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Parts tracker down?
|
|
I have been unable to access the parts tracker for about a week now. Does anybody know what is going on with it or when the problems will be fixed? (21 years ago, 5-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
Steve Bliss <steve.bliss@earthlink.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:4pc2bvo3amq7f4a...4ax.com... (...) I hven't read the whole discussion but this is the wound point. I'm not a real LUGNET member because of the payment. I think a membership is'n a (...) (21 years ago, 2-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) 1..2..3 not me! Seriously though, it's a good idea in the long term, but as you seem to imply, not so feasible in the short term. We have a few more immediate tasks to occupy ourselves, including getting voting up, getting the LSC off the (...) (21 years ago, 2-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) D'oh! Yeah, I'm for that one. (...) Right. (...) I'm for it as *one potential* method of verification, but not as *the exclusive* method. -Tim (21 years ago, 2-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
