 | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Only because it is the only other forum which I know you use, that's all. Really. (...) It wasn't my intention to insinuate that. I was making a comparison based on tone. Style. Manner. That sort of thing. (...) My only point is that a JLUG (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) He's not necessarily in the "still reading" subgroup category. He could've been just popping over to LUGNET when he got "pinged" by a regular reader, or after a major event like an ILTCO convention. Which is exactly what I suspect is the case. (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) I'm not sure why you're bringing Jlug into the discussion here. If I could set the fut to lugnet.org.jlug right now, I would. But now that you have, I say you're arguing from ignorance. There's a far greater sense of camraderie there than I've (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) I think what Dave is driving at is that even though your actions may technically be with the TOS, it is a question of civility. Pushing people's hot buttons and watching the fireworks isn't what LUGNET is about. Lugnet is about laughing with (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX) !!
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) OK. Let's try this from the other direction, kiddies. The populace that still reads Lugnet is a group of people. It contains many subgroups, for example: The people that still read lugnet.org.scibrick The people that still read a few groups (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
