Subject:
|
Re: Build sets from "My Parts"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.inv
|
Date:
|
Wed, 7 May 2003 04:55:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3372 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.inv, Dan Boger writes:
> On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 05:58:58PM +0000, Suzanne D. Rich wrote:
> > I am personally crushed and shocked that Peeron would impliment this
> > feature for its own site, after Dan and I, and others, discussed doing
> > it for LUGNET members, in discussions on LUGNET's internal mailing-list.
>
> I beg your pardon? When I suggested this (2 years ago), we were talking
> that this will be implemented on Peeron - as LUGENT has no facilities to
> do this. It IS done for LUGNET members, as well as non-members.
My personal recollection is that Suzanne was the one who came up with
the idea, back in 1996, and shared the idea with a few people during
BrickFest 2001 and again last summer. I don't remember anyone ever
discussing that it would be implemented on Peeron. But again that's my
personal recollection, and I don't claim to be omniscient.
> Also, when I tried to integrate My Parts closer into LUGNET's interface,
> I was asked not to code this for LUGNET,
You do remember why, right? When you asked if you could put a field
in the LUGNET member profile saying "Your Peeron User ID" and described a
matching/verification method, my response was that I wanted to implement
it in a general way, because there are other sites with userid's besides
peeron.com (lego.com, mocpages.com, brickshelf.com, bricklink.com, etc.),
and it makes the most sense from LUGNET's point of view to handle these
id's in a general way, rather than defining a single new field and making
HTML form changes appearing to favor any one specific site.
> due to the "appearence of impropriety".
I don't think I used those words, but I do remember writing:
TSL> Because of the potentially sensitive nature of the information being
TSL> shared, I need to be the one held personally accountable for coding,
TSL> etc. on this feature, so please hold off from making any changes on the
TSL> LUGNET server. Plus, it could be viewed by people as a conflict of
TSL> interest if you were the implementor of this on the LUGNET side.
The central idea is this: Since Peeron competes with LUGNET in various
ways, your server access on LUGNET is a potential conflict of interest in
various ways: As owner/operator of Peeron[tm], naturally it's your
responsibility to act in Peeron's best interests, but as someone with
access to the LUGNET[tm] server, naturally you also bear a responsibility
to act in LUGNET's best interests whenever possible. A delicate balancing
act, to be sure, but ultimately you have to make choices.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Build sets from "My Parts"
|
| <snip> I am not privy to all the internal discussion nor do I want to comment about who said what (how would I know?). I just hope that this difference is resolved rather than growing into a rift. The community sites are isolated enough as it is, (...) (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.inv)
| | | Re: Build sets from "My Parts"
|
| (...) The first time I heard this mentioned is at our apt at BF01 - Suz, Steve, Jenn and I were brainstorming. When I brought this up, we were talking about how we could implement it on LUGNET, with a LUGNET look and feel, but "powered by Peeron". (...) (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.inv)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Build sets from "My Parts"
|
| (...) I beg your pardon? When I suggested this (2 years ago), we were talking that this will be implemented on Peeron - as LUGENT has no facilities to do this. It IS done for LUGNET members, as well as non-members. Also, when I tried to integrate My (...) (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.inv)
|
32 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
|
|
|
|
