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 / *28236 (-20)
  Re: 'Lego Ban' at Seattle School Fueled by Anti-Private Property Crusaders
 
(...) Hmm. If I was a kid in this class I'd steal my teacher's car. How could they press charges, given their professed beliefs? Bruce (18 years ago, 28-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Technic sidebar thingie
 
This is directed to all people who would like to see sanctions against Ross. (...) I am so sorry that I haven't received Ross' and Eric's emails regarding this matter (both sent before Bob's posting), because if I would have received one of them or (...) (18 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.curators)  
 
  Re: Technic sidebar thingie
 
(...) Gimme a break. This is a prank gone wrong, not an abuse of power. Deleting all of a member's posts, or breaking links in a way that couldn't be restored, that would be an abuse. This was actually a little bit funny (and a little mean, I (...) (18 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX) ! 
 
  Re: Technic sidebar thingie
 
(...) So it's OK for you to abuse administrative privilege, as long as only one or two people are bothered by it? Especially if one of the two is a person that a significant people on LUGNET feel it's OK to bully? I just have to post here to say I (...) (18 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX) ! 
 
  Re: Technic sidebar thingie
 
(...) No. The admins will determine if I crossed any line, and take action as necessary. (...) Firstly, that has nothing to do with the point I was making about wanting ALL admins to be "in the loop" when someone "contacts admin". And secondly, the (...) (18 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Technic sidebar thingie
 
(...) A point which is still apparently lost on you? (...) So you sent e-mail to the admins, and then in the absence of a response you assumed that you had administrative approval to alter somebody else's content? No problem. Sure. (...) Under the (...) (18 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
 
  Re: Technic sidebar thingie
 
(...) Well, that's even worse, and should be fixed. (...) No, that's a different point entirely. (...) I don't think anyone had a problem with Dave reverting the pics, do you? (...) At least (URL) one person did>, and preferred to email the admins (...) (18 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, 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 (18 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 (...) (18 years ago, 17-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, 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 (...) (18 years ago, 17-Feb-07, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  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 (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, 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". (...) (18 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 (18 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. (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: malicious behavior
 
(...) Yes, Ross, you made that perfectly clear. What you haven't made so clear is WHY you think that for no apparent reason. (...) Because I have no evidence to the contrary. You are obtuse. (...) Is that why you know so much about him-- because you (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: malicious behavior
 
(...) He could also be still reading. (...) Why do you suspect that? (...) (URL) Oh I doubt it>. Of course that could just be someone impersonating him. (...) I never claimed to know about his Lugnet reading habits. (...) Or even moot. Yes, I do (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: malicious behavior
 
(...) He's not necessarily in the "still reading" subgroup category. He could've been just popping over to LUGNET when he got "pinged" by a regular reader, or after a major event like an ILTCO convention. Which is exactly what I suspect is the case. (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: malicious behavior
 
(...) OK. Let's try this from the other direction, kiddies. The populace that still reads Lugnet is a group of people. It contains many subgroups, for example: The people that still read lugnet.org.scibrick The people that still read a few groups (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: malicious behavior
 
(...) Well, my point is that you have no reason to think that. (...) You know my neighbor, and where we live? I chose my neighbor precisely because you don't know him. You don't know anything about him. Just as you don't know anything about any (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: malicious behavior
 
(...) Because I DO. (...) I'm sorry for being so obtuse - I was simply pointing out that asking them is one other way to know (assuming you receive / believe the answer). Standing and looking over their shoulder while they read is another. Do you (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-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