Subject:
|
Re: ScottFroth(tm) answered
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 10 Oct 2001 16:40:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
699 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lawrence Wilkes writes:
> Or better still
> Ban lugnet.off-topic.debate, so we can get back to discussing Lego.
The argument has been made in the past that having .debate as a place to
send off topic debates is good for the rest of LUGNET.
If you want to discuss LEGO, do so. Nothing is stopping you, nothing is
making you post here, and posts here do not as a habit spill out elsewhere.
Change the channel, don't call for the channel's abolishment. It is up to
the owners of LUGNET to decide, of course.
My suggestion of a binding vote, with .debate participants being the voters,
was a totally serious one, whatever you or anyone else thinks.
I seriously agree with others that have said that .debate is less useful to
other participants with both Scott and myself in it and infighting, and
banishing one of us may well return it to some more useful state.
I of course have a preference as to which one is the more useful poster
here, but I am biased.
Scott has already said he would not abide by such an outcome. I would. What
does that tell you about the relative merits of each candidacy?
The actual mechanism of banishment need not involve actual administrative
action, at least in my case, as I would abide without the need for such a
mechanism.
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: ScottFroth(tm) answered
|
| (...) Hear, hear! Bionicle has very little to do with LEGO, but it's granted its own on-topic posting group. OT.Debate need not be read by anyone not wishing to do so. Dave! (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: ScottFroth(tm) answered
|
| "Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GL00zG.IEF@lugnet.com... (...) Lighten up. I should have put a smiley on it Oh, and my vote is no one should be banned. No one forces anyone to read or reply to what is posted here. (...) (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: ScottFroth(tm) answered
|
| (...) This not true Larry. Where did I say that? I rejected the whole foolish notion - not its outcome. If I did take part, I would "abide by such an outcome". But I am not, so this is not an issue. Perhaps you could run alone: Vote 1) Larry Stays (...) (23 years ago, 11-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: ScottFroth(tm) answered
|
| "Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GKzyrx.D4z@lugnet.com... (...) What about a fight to the death? Via webcam of course. Or better still Ban lugnet.off-topic.debate, so we can get back to discussing Lego. regards (...) (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
118 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
