|
|
 | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) LOL, and again you take "I think" and change it to an assertion of knowledge. ROSCO (19 years ago, 17-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Technic sidebar thingie
|
| (...) Are you stalking me?!? Ah yes, I remember claiming to be perfect, It was a Tuesday and it was raining, not hard, it was a gentle rain... Try I do not post pictures of what I build because it is not a big motivation of mine and I currently do (...) (19 years ago, 17-Feb-07, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) You'd know. JOHN (19 years ago, 17-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) I prefer to think of Al as a jerk with the lot. ROSCO (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) See, Al, at the end of the day, you're just a plain jerk. JOHN (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) In fact it wasn't all online. (...) It wasn't. And the FAQ doesn't say it was. It says "it started making sense to have a group that could participate online". I see no "need" in that excerpt at all. Just as there was no "need" for the (...) (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) <snip> (...) <snip> Verbose? Who, me?? Dave K -no one around here but us scarecrows... (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Actually, there ARE other ways-- ish-- but they're not easy! And they're not necessarily open to everyone. For instance, an admin could check on the Lugnet server to see how many times he's logged in. But it's not public information. You can (...) (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Before my time. Ross is the man to ask about that. I don't particularly care. (...) I never said it was. 'Shenanigans' is just a turn of phrase. He seems quite sincere, and verbose. (...) Me too. And sometimes (not every time as some seem to (...) (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Why do you believe in god? (...) John, I think this could be cleared up easily by looking at how we interpret words. Lar has posted tice in the last six months, you consider that "not still reading", I consider it "still reading occasionally". (...) (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Well I guess if he has a group of African girls with laptops replying for him then maybe he is unaware of what he has replied to. ROSCO (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Don't assume. I have only read what is in o-t-d, I have not gone back to the original thread, and judging by what I've seen in here, I don't feel the need to waste the time. (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | A long sentence of relatively little import -- was Re: Co-curator update needed?
|
| (...) This, of course, would play right into Matthew's idea-- (URL) I'll go-- "Flash! Ou reporters have just unearthed this startling, world shaking discovery!", exclaimed the visibly exhausted reporter as he stood in front of the newscamera and (...) (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | | | Standing up! Was... Re: malicious behavior
|
| Moving this back to o.t.d. for debatable reasions... (...) As a somewhat parenthetical point to what Marc said above (though flowing right from his poat)-- At what point should people 'stand up' against (maybe perceived) transgressions? I mean, (...) (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Say, you're not in the press corps, are you? ;-) Ah, the good, old days of Watergate... (...) Exactly. (...) To Plame? Only that she can get rich off of a book/TV movie deal. Bottom line-- much ado about nothing. JOHN (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Kinda sad, really... ended in a whimper instead of a bang... Eh, I have no idea what the results will be. After all the data I've read, it's pretty convoluted--who said what to whom and when... And, as I'm told around here, in the grande (...) (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) <spits pop all over screen> I hope this is an example of that Canadian humour you were talking about! The Libby trial makes this kerfuffle seem like world war! :-) JOHN (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Why the sigh? It says JLUG is not for children and there are no rules. Fine. Now this part I don't get: "The JLUG is a group of Lego enthusiast that are not geographically centred but certainly work together through online communication. After (...) (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (snip everybody) Here's the thing, Dave: you're totally right. But there's no point in worrying about it any more. There seems to be a consensus that it's OK to bully Eric on LUGNET. I've (URL) protested it before>, but apparently the admins and the (...) (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Special deals for lawyers, too! I love it:-) lol (...) And the number one thing LUGNET is about is.... (at least, me) Camaraderie. But hey, I'm into pyro, too! (URL) (I'm in some of those pics!) JOHN (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
|
