| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Kevin Blocksidge wrote:
>
> > I think that the point Suz was trying to make is that often Lar is right.
> > Lar sees a problem, he doesn't stay quiet and live with it. He tried to fix
> > the problem. In this case, he used something like civil disobedience to
> > make a point.
>
> But the disobedient civilian must accept the price for his disobedience,
> otherwise it's just posturing like a rhinoceros. In the same way that a
> journalist should be willing to go to jail to protect his treasonous source, a
> Bricklink customer should be willing to accept the ban if he willingly violates
> the TOS on principle.
I am not sure, but I haven't seen anything from Lar saying that he is mad or
thinks he was treated unjust. If he has, I'll have to rethink my position
> > It's not because it is "The Great Lar++", it is because Larry is consistently
> > acting in the best interest of the community. If he didn't often point out
> > problems and than help fix him, he wouldn't be "The Great Lar++".
> >
> > His history shows that people should consider what he says, not ban him for
> > insubordination.
>
> As I read the thread-tree on Bricklink, he was banned for willful violation of
> the TOS, in which case the ban is appropriate. As has been pointed out
> elsewhere, Lar has vocally supported the banning of TOS-violators, and he's
> endorsed elaborate ceremonies of capitulation to reinstate those violators.
> Therefore he should certainly be held to that same standard.
I agree, he was rightfully banned, no argueing there. But on the other hand,
the rules themselves should be changed (ie: continuous stock)
>
> > BL needs Lar, Lugnet needs Lar, the LEGO community needs Lar. Why? Because of
> > his insightful vision of how things should be.
>
> If Lar disappeared today, or if you or I or LUGNET Member X disappeared today,
> the community would absorb the loss in pretty short order. Even if Todd or Suz
> vanished suddenly, the community would struggle on (and I suspect that even
> LUGNET would survive the loss, after a period of restructuring). No one is
> indispensible. If nothing else, we'd move our conversations back to RTL until
> something new popped up.
Right, I am not saying that all would fall apart... but I do think that without
people like Lar, the community wouldn't have expanded and improved as rapidly as
it has.
~Kevin
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
131 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
|
|
|
|
