Subject:
|
Re: stepping up to the dead horse (was some other title)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 21:50:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3074 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > It is not the current policy to comment on who has or hasn't been given a
> > timeout (a timeout is different than being banned, I note) so if you have
> > concluded that no one has gotten any timeouts, you may not necessarily be
> > correct.
>
> You've spent too much time dealing with NDAs. Seriously, did you agree to not
> discuss whether or not, in general terms, timeouts had been handed down?
No I didn't.
In fact I already said elsewhere that some had. And, it's causing some very
unfortunate confusion: http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=12077 ... someone
has made an invalid assumption there, and forgotten that we don't censor, we can
only request cancels which users are free to ignore, and if they do, all we can
do is decide if the ignoring merits a timeout or lengthening of an already
planned on.
> No, wait -- you wouldn't be able to discuss whether you agreed to not discuss it.
Er, oops! Forget I said anything. (more and more thinking that the current
policy about this (which I advocated) needs to change...)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
103 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
|
|
|
|
