Subject:
|
Re: Expert Builder website - Great response results in first update
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 8 Jan 2002 02:21:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1218 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> In lugnet.general, Jude Beaudin writes:
> > In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> > > In lugnet.general, Jude Beaudin writes:
> > > > In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
>
> > > > Would you post a view contrary to your own if I submitted it?
> > >
> > > Isn't that what LUGNET is for? :)
> > >
> > > In all honesty.... I don't know. I'd have to read the letter and see.
> > >
> > > But frankly, of the two letters already posted, there are points with which
> > > I do not agree. However, the overall tone *is* in keeping with the overall
> > > theme of the site.
> > >
> > > I know that doesn't completely answer your question, but I wouldn't like to
> > > commit to anything until I'd read the letter first.
>
> > So are you saying that you will censor what is posted, especially if it does
> > not reflect your apparent theme of 'Classic LEGO good, Current LEGO bad'?
>
> I'm saying I can't speak until I read the letter. After all that's gone on
> in this thread tonight, this is as honest as I can be with you.
>
> I've also clearly and publically stated that the site is an autocracy, not a
> democracy. It's rule by one. It's meant for a purpose and I intend to keep
> to that purpose. I had a recent life event that reminded me that we are all
> only here for a short time. My time will be spent trying to get someone to
> pay attention.
>
> Perhaps my biggest fault is that I care too much about this company and
> their products. Maybe some of my foolish sentamentalism causes me to do
> silly things from time to time. But as I said to Richie in this thread... I
> really thought I was doing folks a favor by taking these alternative
> opinions away from LUGNET. To allow LUGNET to be as it is, without my
> postings to sour it.
I do not see your opinions being expressed as souring LUGNET. Now if you
carry them into a flamewar then then I could see it.
Although I do find it strange that you want to advertise the alternate
opinions that you want to take away from LUGNET on LUGNET. : /
>
> To get back to your original question... if someone has something to say,
> they are free (within reason) to post it to LUGNET. People pay to become
> members of LUGNET. LUGNET is organized and run as a community with elders
> and other members. My site is different. I pay for the domain. I pay for
> the web hosting. I put my own time into what gets posted (or doesn't). I'm
> not asking for donations or for anyone to pay a cent. If you want to read
> what's there.... it's free. Otherwise, no questions asked, thanks for coming.
>
> But an interesting thing has happened over the last few days. About 1/2 the
> hits I'm getting are now direct or bookmarked links. (As opposed to links
> coming from postings to LUGNET or search engines) People are coming back.
> I wonder why?
A million flies going to the dump cannot be wrong. :-)
>
> Regards,
> Allan B.
>
> - The Expert Builder website
> - http://www.apotome.com/builder/index.htm
Look Allan, I am not out to bash you, I just wanted to know how far you are
going to take your agenda. Some online shopping sites allow people to review
the products uncensored (barring foul language, of course) while others will
post only the positive comments that receive. Apparently you are going to
run your site like the latter and I think people need to know that.
I do not have a problem with someone who wants to create a review site and I
wish you the best with it.
Jude
BTW, I too would prefer that LEGO focus more on better model design than
element variety.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
63 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
|
|
|
|
