To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
To LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / *53696 (-20)
  Re: malicious behavior
 
(...) Snipped (...) No, they are AFOLs. Just because I am geographically challenged to them, doesnt mean I didnt actually make the drive (numerous times). Snipped more... (...) Indeed. (...) Exactly (*grins*). Janey "Delusional, Red Brick" (19 years ago, 18-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
 
  Re: malicious behavior
 
(...) It's not shocking, just unclear. Not that it really matters, but these friends with whom you joked-- they aren't AFOLs I assume, because presumabley they are the ones with whom you are geographically challenged. Perhaps you joked with (...) (19 years ago, 18-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
 
  Re: malicious behavior
 
(...) You are wrong. I think I would know, since I wrote that, and I was the one joking around. The whole thing started as a joke in real life, because I am geographically challenged from other "local" groups. You know, friends joking... real people (...) (19 years ago, 18-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
 
  Re: Technic sidebar thingie
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Kevin Heckel wrote: <snip> (...) I've never posted to Brickshelf--do I have to leave LUGNET? <snip> Dave K (19 years ago, 17-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Technic sidebar thingie
 
(...) Nice dodge. It took about two minutes to look through your Lugnet post history. (...) This begs the question: Why post on a lego forum if not to share your lego things? (...) I'm not asking you to post every last MOC to Brickshelf, but you (...) (19 years ago, 17-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  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)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR