 | | Re: 6030 MISB lost in Slovakia
|
|
(...) Because he 'claimed' he didn't receive it. A bit of spam rates pretty low in terms of harshness IMO, but I guess YMMV. (16 years ago, 3-Jun-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 6030 MISB lost in Slovakia
|
|
--snip-- (...) Because he didn't receive the set? Seems a bit harsh to me. Tim (16 years ago, 3-Jun-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 6030 MISB lost in Slovakia
|
|
(...) Actually, it is entered by the user. It's done in the posting setup. That's why everyone uses a different method. As for the OP, I can't really balme her for wanting that guy to get a bit of spam. Al. (16 years ago, 3-Jun-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 6030 MISB lost in Slovakia
|
|
(...) I'm not sure if LUGNET does protect raw email addresses but they're certainly not all automatic. Mine is as I entered it with my own anti-spam system. I seem to remember an option being 'spam protected email' address or something similar. Tim (16 years ago, 3-Jun-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 6030 MISB lost in Slovakia
|
|
(...) Agreed. (...) I'm not trying to take sides in this at all, but don't forget that when you see something like this: "From: "Anne Schubert" chomper95 @ NOSPAM juno.com" at the top of a legnet post, it is being put in automatically by legnet's (...) (16 years ago, 2-Jun-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 6030 MISB lost in Slovakia
|
|
(...) Indeed. Though I find myself wondering why Martin's, John's and your posts were all crossposted to off-topic.debate. The content, while probably off-topic for castle, is not off-topic per se, in my view. I've set the FUT to (...) (16 years ago, 2-Jun-08, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 6030 MISB lost in Slovakia
|
|
(...) --snip-- (...) Most certainly posting a full and raw e-mail address is extremely rude and disrespectful. I note that Anne includes an anti-spam section in her own posting address here and to not offer the some privilege to someone else is (...) (16 years ago, 2-Jun-08, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 6030 MISB lost in Slovakia
|
|
(...) Give the guy a brake, he wasn't being "political incorrect" and it is good to know about problems so the rest of us do not make the same mistake or fall into the same trap, which ever. Had he said the US or Canada or GB would he have been (...) (16 years ago, 1-Jun-08, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 6030 MISB lost in Slovakia
|
|
(...) A couple of days ago, on some other website, I read a message from a Slovakian AFOL complaining about not getting an uninsured MISB 6030... yes, it was him. In my opinion, it is definitely not honest to make public his full name, member name (...) (16 years ago, 1-Jun-08, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickworld & Rebate Checks
|
|
(...) Great idea! I already had plans to attend (I live in Chicago), but suddenly I am reminded that it really is my patriotic duty to use some of that $ to stimulate the economy. Clearly the only responsible thing to do would be to spend at least a (...) (17 years ago, 15-Feb-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Brickworld & Rebate Checks
|
|
So I saw on the news today that Bush signed his "economic stimulus" plan into law today. This means that many of us in the U.S. could be receiving rebate checks starting in May. How does this relate to LEGO you ask? Well, with Brickworld coming up (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Meta Question
|
|
(...) Agreed - it also makes good business sense. What is your basis for assuming the former possibility and disregarding the latter? (...) I was responding to "I have my doubts that anyone even could [turn a profit]" - by sourcing all my figures (...) (17 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Meta Question
|
|
(...) And there I was thinking it might only be for themes lots of people were interested in. (...) Well (URL) MOCpages> breaks even but (URL) CSF> has, until quite recently been run purely out of pocket. I realise that research is a bit slower than (...) (17 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Meta Question
|
|
(...) That seems to be the consensus. But I don't see any Rock Raiders offshoot sites, which from my external perspective makes it look less about format, and more about cherry-picking... BICBVW! (...) Well, I don't think it's that hard considering (...) (17 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Meta Question
|
|
(...) --snip-- (...) I'm not exactly sure that anyone has attempted to start a new site 'to make a few bucks'. I have my doubts that anyone even could. I believe the first offshoot sites were started due to disagreements about the running and format (...) (17 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Meta Question
|
|
Thanks for the detailed recap! (...) I agree (although that's probably a bit off-topic for off-topic.debate) - I have quite an irrational fondness for this little corner of the internet. Richard (17 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Meta Question
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Adrian Egli wrote: A good question! For certain, RTL did not make a comeback. The theory I've heard is the growth of theme group sites like Classic Space outside of Lugnet have drawn readers away from Lugnet. I always (...) (17 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Meta Question
|
|
(...) I think the problem was that LUGNET didn't respond enough to people's desires. The administration was either inactive or unable to comply, thanks to various reasons. Essentially, LUGNET's software was all custom made to follow an NNTP design (...) (17 years ago, 14-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Meta Question
|
|
(...) A good question! For certain, RTL did not make a comeback. The theory I've heard is the growth of theme group sites like Classic Space outside of Lugnet have drawn readers away from Lugnet. I've also heard people express the opinion that (...) (17 years ago, 14-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Meta Question
|
|
I haven't been around in a while, but I remember Lugnet being a bit more.. well.. alive. The wiki page doesn't illuminate much, and catching up on four years worth of posts doesn't seem terribly feasible. So I was wondering really, what happened? (...) (17 years ago, 14-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
