 | | Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
|
|
(...) Actually, I've found the behavior of some people on "adult" LEGO sites (like Lugnet) to be less mature than the norm on kid-oriented LEGO sites (like BZPower). There have been incidents and member actions on Lugnet that I wouldn't tolerate on (...) (17 years ago, 11-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
|
|
(...) I'm not sure that the sites that prompted your ponderings are really AFOL sites. Not a a critism of them, merely a thought that the standards of maturity might not be what you would like to get from an AFOL site Tim (17 years ago, 11-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
|
|
(...) extremes start when limits are reached. but where (what) are the limits? Some limits are quite clear and well determined : - topic (that's why this thread on lugnet.off-topic part of the site), - TOS,TOU, - federal, national, international (...) (17 years ago, 11-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
|
|
(...) Ah, but where do extremes start? Cheers Richie Dulin (17 years ago, 11-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
|
|
(...) **sighs** I guess when one's hobby is a toy, there will be children involved! :) Personally, I think it's bad for the overall AFOL community. I'll grant you, (A) I'm still sort of new to the community (even with 37 years of LEGO under my (...) (17 years ago, 10-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
|
|
(...) I was recently involved in something similar, when I took exception to the characterization of one site (Site A) by members of another, much larger site (Site B). Frankly, the postings struck me as petty and really kind of snide, and I posted (...) (17 years ago, 10-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
|
|
(...) Well, here's an important distinction: who's doing the saying? And in what capacity? Let's say AFOLS.com is run by Mortimer. And a frequent visitor to the AFOLS.com is Jezebelle. And there's another site called LEGOGEEKS.com, which they hate. (...) (17 years ago, 10-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
|
|
(...) I'm not sure right or wrong have much to do with it, given human nature. Right now, I could easily name three pairs of LEGO-related web sites where your example could apply, including one I run. So I don't think this is anything new. (...) (17 years ago, 10-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
|
|
(...) I don't see what is wrong with it so long as it's not taken to extremes. Tim (17 years ago, 10-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Should AFOL websites keep to themselves?
|
|
While not naming any specific sites, I would be interested in hearing the Community's thoughts on whether you think it right or wrong for one AFOL site to talk about another AFOL site. For purposes of this discussion, we will assume that by talk I (...) (17 years ago, 10-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: peeron inventory
|
|
(...) If it was not you who sent the picture, I am sorry. I do agree Now that I have said some things that I should not have. Those are the examples you quoted above. I was fustrated at months of waiting for changes to appear and Dan didn't answer (...) (17 years ago, 3-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: peeron inventory
|
|
--snip-- (...) Hi John, Thanks for taking that on board. Noone is saying your contribution isn't worthwhile and I don't think anyone minds your regular updates of what you've done. If you stick to these I think we will all be happier. It also means (...) (17 years ago, 3-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: peeron inventory
|
|
(...) I differ with you here. Serious collectors need to know. You have no idea how many are wrong. This is not impolite. It is a systemic problem. Would you feel that it is more polite just to note it on Lugnet? If that is a solution I can do it. I (...) (17 years ago, 3-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: peeron inventory
|
|
(...) Yep--I'm the Mad Dave around here! Worked long and hard for that title and I'm not willing to give it up to any old Dave! Dave K (17 years ago, 3-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: peeron inventory
|
|
(...) Actually, although it was impolite to call me "Mad Dave", I was very amused at the title. Perhaps you've confused the myriad of Dave's involved, or perhaps you have this vision of me where I'm shouting at the top of my lungs or something. (...) (17 years ago, 3-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: peeron inventory
|
|
(...) Yes you do. - "If anyone is spring loaded to the piss off position it is you." - "Valium might be in the future for you, or high blood pressure. You really need to calm down." - "remember 7 comes after 6 and before 8, perhaps that will help." (...) (17 years ago, 3-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: peeron inventory
|
|
(...) --snip-- (...) John, It was not polite to make the comment "Corrections sent to inv@peeron again are not getting posted. It has been a bit since they did a few.". The reason it isn't polite is because it is a) unneccesary and b) expectant as (...) (17 years ago, 3-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: peeron inventory
|
|
(...) Tim: I was not rude to volunteers, I even offered to volunteer to get thing done. I want to help and have only come here when Dan ignored my requests as to what was happening to the corrections sent into Peeron.com. I am still not sure what (...) (17 years ago, 3-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: peeron inventory
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Patterson wrote: --snip-- (...) John, You're really beginning to make me very irritated. You seem unable to accept responsibility for the way you put things and seem to justify this in a variety of ways including (...) (17 years ago, 3-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: peeron inventory
|
|
(...) For a guy who's thick-skinned, you sure when to a lot of trouble to prove it. (17 years ago, 3-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
