Subject:
|
Re: For the Eyes of Alfred Speredelozzi
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 17 Jan 2002 15:51:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
284 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> Alfred:
>
> What would possess you to bring this topic up after the approx. 20 days the
> thread has been dead?
>
> Your suggestion to Larry has been made by others ad nauseam. Everyone here
> can be expected to act in accord with their own wishes. No one is banning
> anyone. The issue is dead.
>
> Please do not post about that issue again -- I think it shows a certain lack
> of social skills, or perhaps something else (of which I wouldn't care to
> speculate).
>
> -- Hop-Frog
Well, my reasoning is this: I don't read every part of Lugnet every day. In
fact, I rarely read (or am even interested in) lugnet.general or lugnet.admin
or off-topic debate. I am interested in Lego. So, what I read is usually
lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space,
lugnet.whateverisaboutbuildingandhavingfunwiththelittleplasticpieces. :)
(Incidentally, the only way I found this was by searching the news for my name,
which I do often enough, just to make sure I am following the threads that I
may have started or replied to.)
You get my point, I am sure.
Anyway, I don't see any of the posts on Lugnet as being off limits for further
discussion. If people thought they are, then they should be cancelled!
Now, I am doing it again. It has been a good 2 weeks or so since this was
posted. I presume you are open to a reply, or you wouldn't have bothered.
Looking at the resultant discussion, I think what I did was a GOOD thing. At
least in the idea that some good "How do we help the community" discussion has
taken place. (Even thoa it was in response to your little flame--which I don't
begrudge your right to post!)
In short, I will not be silenced by the like of you. I will not respect your
command to not post about the issue again. I will say my mind, when and if I
have an opinion.
About my accused lack of social skills.. well, I will follow my own advice, and
not reply on that account.
-Alfred
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: For the Eyes of Alfred Speredelozzi
|
| (...) Right, nothing is off limits. At the same time, people are expected to post INFORMED statements showing that they have read most of the thread and at least understand the basic issue under discussion. You did neither, and in general that is (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: For the Eyes of Alfred Speredelozzi
|
| (...) Alfred, I don't know how resolved this is in your understanding at this point. To those of us who are the insiders here, or at least to me, this is how it seemed: 1) There was this long-running fairly disruptive fight thing going on about, (...) (22 years ago, 18-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | For the Eyes of Alfred Speredelozzi
|
| Alfred: What would possess you to bring this topic up after the approx. 20 days the thread has been dead? Your suggestion to Larry has been made by others ad nauseam. Everyone here can be expected to act in accord with their own wishes. No one is (...) (23 years ago, 17-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
  
- 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
|
|
|
|
