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 / *15401 (-20)
  Re: Reiterating my thoughts on the Avatar issue
 
"tom" <tinosanto@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:GpKvLE.8u7@lugnet.com... (...) said" Matthew-- I mean Tom. Stop now. Please. I really think its time for you to go back and lurk some more. Or go do whatever it was you did before this thread. (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Had to Push it? (you immature twit)
 
"tom" <tinosanto@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:GpKxEH.Epo@lugnet.com... (...) Really, (...) Don't you realize typing in all caps is immature? And maybe I snipped that because I had no argument with it or acknowledged it. Maybe you'll never (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Had to Push it? (you immature twit)
 
Noticed you cut every part where I said that I do not think that image belongs on brickshelf, very clever Timmy. But have you realised that I DO NOT THINK ADULT IMAGES BELONG ON BRICKSHELF! Do you understand this? Really, honestly... do you? tom (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Had to Push it? (you immature twit)
 
"tom" <tinosanto@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:GpKwos.Bpt@lugnet.com... (...) Wow, you're very articulate. And smart too, for finding a derivitave of my name. I applaud you. (...) up... I most definitely did not put that image up. After viewing (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Had to Push it? (you immature twit)
 
(...) Timmy, shut up! How many times do I have to say adult content is not approiate for brickshelf? Really Timmy, how many times must I say this befor it registers in that thick head of yours?? This is really making me sick. (...) SO DO I TIMMY - I (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Try for summary of this debate...
 
(...) I agree 100%, and even if we did have hard data on this, it is not our place to worry about bandwidth, that concern is Kevin's and not ours. Kevin is the one who pays for it, not us - so he should be the one concerned with this. tom (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Reiterating my thoughts on the Avatar issue
 
And before you go off and say that I misquoted you, (URL) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Reiterating my thoughts on the Avatar issue
 
The title of this should be 'Jon trying to change and cleanup what he said" (...) it was a 'I do not like these, so lets get rid of them' post. (taken from your first post on this) "These Avatar images (etc..) seem to pertain to a website called (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Had to Push it? (you immature twit)
 
(...) Are you trying to say I did this? If you are saying that I did this please be man enough and say it. I noticed you left out any names on your 'thoughtfull' post. *For the record*, **I did not put any pictres up on brickshelf**, but if your (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Try for summary of this debate...
 
(...) I'd like to highlight this a bit more. I think it would be a big mistake to make any value judgements based on popularity contests for what content is allowed. A "highlights" page which brought forth folders or images which are highly rated (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Try for summary of this debate...
 
(...) Can we stop speculating about the bandwidth used. Kevin is really the only one who can answer that, and until we know they are a bandwidth problem, it's somewhat pointless to speculate about that. (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Try for summary of this debate...
 
(...) Absolutely agreed. I think we've got to be careful about how we talk about the bandwidth issue until we have hard data. (...) I definitely agree with the above. (...) Umm, isn't a 9 year old breaking Brickshelf's TOS no matter what he/she (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
(...) ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head -- Mark's Lego Creations (URL) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
(...) *whoosh!* That's the sound of sarcasm going over your head. Jeff (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
"Tim Courtney" <tim@zacktron.com> wrote in message news:GpJJ4K.5Du@lugnet.com... (...) Tim, your efforts in attempting to reply to _every_ single statement that "tom" makes have earned you the title of Tireless Rebutter: (URL) go to bed. Or to (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
"Jon Palmer" <jpalmer@oklahoma.net> wrote in message news:GpI9wI.B8F@lugnet.com... (...) Find tolerance. Sorry for being so blunt, by the way. -- Cheers, Paul LUGNET member 164 (URL) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
 
"Mark Sandlin" <sandlin@nwlink.com> wrote in message news:GpIBx2.FDz@lugnet.com... (...) easy! (...) Yeah, thanks for sharing, Evil Clown. (URL) member 164 (URL) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Reiterating my thoughts on the Avatar issue
 
"Jon Palmer" <jpalmer@oklahoma.net> wrote in message news:GpJ9nA.M6F@lugnet.com... (...) far (...) post (...) Tolerate the avatars, please! They are so easy to ignore. Don't blow _them_ out of proportion. I find yet-another-mecha about as exciting (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Try for summary of this debate...
 
(...) Remember, these aren't seen only by people looking at the Brickshelf recent page. They are loaded everytime the owner posts a message to a webforum, which means every time a person reads one of those messages, the images gets loaded (barring (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Try for summary of this debate...
 
(...) Just looking at the size of these, they seem negligible even compared to the stuff in my own folders. So I don't think bandwidth is a huge factor. The main beef I would have is that they put each one in a separate folder (which you talk about (...) (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