To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *15381 (-20)
  Re: Try for summary of this debate...
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: -snip- for brevity (...) A fair summary. Wisely left out the emotional baggage that got picked up on the way. (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Try for summary of this debate...
 
(...) (gen*I*talia but who's counting) OK, thanks for that info. I've seen nekkid girls before so I guess I didn't miss much there. But was it anyone we KNOW??? Um, can I suggest that someone summarize the larger discussion and see if it can be put (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
<snippage of old convos> (...) First of all, bandwidth is not your concern. No matter how you spin it, bandwith is not your concern. And that is not how this starterd, it started. This started because Jon thought they were ugly and was tired of (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Had to Push it? (you immature twit)
 
(...) It was an image of a totally naked woman with LEGO bricks covering up the genetalia. -Tim (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Had to Push it? (you immature twit)
 
(...) I think the admins have dealt with it already because I get a blank page. Can someone (while remaining within the bounds of gentle speech and the LUGNET TOS, please) say what it was? Who or what was it insulting/mocking, etc? Thanks (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
(...) Ouch! I had not heard that particular turn of phrase before and the vision it brings me is *not* a pain free one in any way shape or form. That is the only reason I set XFUT to .fun... to share that vision with y'all. If you feel like (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
(...) I missed the image. Was it a la 'American Beauty' ? Then you are right, that is more interesting. - Kyle (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
(...) I think it is abuse because it seems like they're always some new ones, usually in the same folders or by the same people, they are of no interest to *anyone* I know browsing the recent page, and they are not showcasing models or ideas or Lego (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Had to Push it? (you immature twit)
 
(...) <Ahem> Good point (and for the record-- no:-) -John (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Had to Push it? (you immature twit)
 
(...) What if it was Kevin who deleted them? You calling him a twit? ;D Jeff (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Had to Push it? (you immature twit)
 
(...) Indeed. And now the twit has removed them. I did, however, download the images and will be forwarding them to Kevin for his consideration. -John (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Had to Push it? (you immature twit)
 
"Rob Drechsel" <robo2705@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:GpJury.DpI@lugnet.com... (...) Jason at (...) don't (...) Though inappropriate, its 'Lego-related content.' I'd be expecting Tom Inosanto to be defending it anytime now. For the record, I (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Had to Push it? (you immature twit)
 
(...) This is uncalled for, and it's certainly not needed on brickshelf. I don't want to hear it justified because "it has bricks!" Rob robo2705@hotmail.com (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Had to Push it? (you immature twit)
 
Well, I think this sums it up: (URL) take long. And some moron will eventually come along and burn Jason at Brickfilms as well (to tie in another debate). <sigh> -John (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
(...) I still don't see how they are abuse (now if a single individual had uploaded say 1000 [or even 10] avatars each in their own folder so that they dominated the recent updates pages, that might be abuse). To be honest, I find the pages (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
(...) Of course many of the repeat viewings will be satisfied from cache and will take very little Brickshelf bandwidth (some is still used to check to see if the file has changed). I'm afraid we will have to let Kevin publish some stats on (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
(...) I find that your statements to the effect that Jon is immature for suggesting it means you feel he is NOT within his rights. (...) You're not getting the point. We want a change in TOS. We realize they do belong, we want that to change. (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tom Inosanto writes: <snip> (...) Obviously, you don't. Have your own server host these erroneous bits of drivel if you do. (...) I don't think Jeff has to be told what he was saying, he's very competent. (...) This, (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
<snip old convo> (...) Never said you could not ask for this ban. Please point me to where I did say that. (...) And I understand that. (...) lol, maybe not in that line but its what you are saying. (...) I agree with you 100% (...) Yes it does, go (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
"tom" <tinosanto@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:GpJL5L.BLE@lugnet.com... (...) it, (...) And (...) Are you saying a majority opinion disliking the images would be irrelevant because they are LEGO related? Hypothetically, what if Kevin were to (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

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