Subject:
|
Re: suspended Bricklink shops.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 24 Aug 2004 04:03:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2173 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Thomas Stangl wrote:
> Mark P wrote:
>
> > I have said countless times in the last few days in direct regards to this
> > situation - I am not trying to tell anybody they can not have, or voice thier
> > opinion. But when you base your opinion on false information that some people
> > continue to dish out, or inclomplete and/or twisted facts - there is a problem
> > in that *IMHO*. And also, some people are acting like thier opinion is what
> > should be followed - agian, not the case.
> >
> > I have no stake in this other than I do not like seeing Dan get bashed over
> > false, incomplete or twisted facts as is being done in an overwhelmingly
> > abudnace.
>
> I would say that it would be more productive to ask Dan to state his side of the
> story, rather than try to convince everyone else to shut up.
Tom, do me a favor - copy this over, paste in in your word editor, print it up
and post it above your monitor:
I am not, and have not told anybody to shut up. I have not, and am not telling
anybody to not have or voice their opinion.
Can you do that for me please? I have really said it many times and the fact you
still chose to ignore it is just kinda sad. I myself am voicing my opinion, so
it is pointless for me to do so if I was telling others NOT to voice thiers. Go
back and read my post that you quoted - I said it very clearly there, I wonder
what about it went over your head.
There IS something I am trying to stop - that is the misinformation and twisting
of the facts that some people are on a mission to present. THAT I am trying to
stop -- is there something wrong with that? If you say yes, are you saying its
ok for people to go around telling lies, twisting the truth just to start some
trouble? And I have said WHY I am doing that in my previous post... yet another
part you either missed or just chose to ignore. I do indeed have a very large
problem with the people that are doing that, and the harm it HAS caused -- do
you fault me for that? If so I can live with that just fine.
> The only way we will get Dan's side of the story is if *Dan speaks up*. If he does
> not, BL's reputation will suffer, as currently the data on the plate looks bad for
> Dan.
Dan has said why he did what he did. It may not be what you are looking for, or
what you think he should have said - but he did say why. Perhaps you meant to
say "He should tell us more"?
>
> > Dan is a great guy who works darn hard at trying to give us a great site like BL
>
> Agreed.
Hey, at least I got that ;)
>
> > - and he does what he thinks needs to be done.
>
> What is being argued was whether what he thought needed to be done was really such a
> good idea, regardless of whether he could do it or not. We all agree he *can*.
A good idea to who? To Dan? I assume if he thought it was a bad idea he would
not have done it. Or do you mean to people like you? If thats what you mean - so
what? Why does it matter so much then? Obviously some people think its a
horrible idea, and others think its the best thing since sliced bread. But I
miss why Dan needs to sell it to anybody, can you expalin that to me (if thats
what you meant). And I do not think that nybody has questioned if he could or
not (at least not that I have seen or can recall).
> > I can understand 100% why people may not
> > agree with what he did based on what they know (or in some cases think they
> > know) - but much of those feelings have been based on false, incomplete or
> > twisted facts.
>
> Every bit of data out there, at this moment, makes it seem like Dan PMSed and
> capriciously banned Lar. And until Dan presents his side, what I've seen is all I
> have to go on. Only Dan can change the data set I have to work with at this point.
And there is nothing wrong with basing your thoughts on only the facts that are
out there for you to see. I have zero problem with that. I said what I had a
problem in my last post and really do not feel the need to re-post it when all
you have to do is look back.
> > If you are going to be upset at somebody - at least make sure you
> > know the story before you get upset.
>
> How can we? You're basically telling everyone to shut up and take Dan's action as
> is. How could we *possibly* ever know the story if we did that?
Sorry, not the case. And I have no idea how you could *possibly* ever know the
story if you did that -- but thats pointless because thats not what I am doing
(this is where you refer to what I hope you printed out and now have hanging
over your monitor).
> > So you may say - 'but thats what we are
> > doing, asking questions'. Hey, thats great -- really it is I honestly applaud
> > people who ARE trying to get the full story. But you need to undertand who does,
> > and who does not have the full story.
>
> Dan is the only one with the "full story" at this point, from what I can see. Not
> even Lar has the full story, since he can't read Dan's mind.
>
> Again, however, if/until Dan *speaks up*, we have to go with what we have for data,
Exactly! And again, if you are basing your opinion on the facts that are out
there then that is great - not a darn thing wrong with that!! You understand
that?
> Only Dan can possibly heal the damage done to BL at this point (note I am not
> *demanding*, or even suggesting, what action would heal).
Thats taking into consideration you think damage has been done. And different
people will have different feelings about that. Please note I am not, and have
not said my personal feelings on what has happened - I am just.. well I already
posted it in my last post in this line of the tree -- did you see it?
Mark P
LoB
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: suspended Bricklink shops.
|
| (...) I would say that it would be more productive to ask Dan to state his side of the story, rather than try to convince everyone else to shut up. The only way we will get Dan's side of the story is if *Dan speaks up*. If he does not, BL's (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
131 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
|
|
|
|
