To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
To LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / *53957 (-5)
  Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
 
(...) I'll jump in here and (not having read the whole thread) I'm sure I'll state something that's blatantly obvious and has (probably) been stated-- Censorship is some form of management (parent/school board/society) *denying* access to some (...) (19 years ago, 13-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
 
(...) Let me spell out the difference: on one you single out a post for the warning, on the other it covers the whole site. Understand now? (...) I believe there's ample proof that you do hold something against JLUG. You even went so far as to (...) (19 years ago, 13-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
 
(...) Cute! (19 years ago, 13-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
 
(...) All censorship is equal, but some censorship is more equal than others. (19 years ago, 13-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
 
(...) So how is that different from having to click an extra link to see the "un-murfled" version of a message? Do you recognize only shades of grey, but not shades of pink? (...) Well you've got me wrong there. I believe there is ample proof in the (...) (19 years ago, 13-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more
Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

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