 | | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) That’s –EXACTLY- how I felt! Why’d Tim have to ‘Five-O’ u on such a minor statement? He could of just ignored it and let it pass. (It’s not like the whole newsgroup was about to be spammed by ‘lewd-anagrams!’) This just totally wastes Suz’ (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) Sorry, Richard. I cant speak for Calum. I can speak for me. I personally was not going to wade into this BUT you did bring up my name. I was not/ am not hanging my head in shame. What happened, happened. It was unfortunate that Iain, did not (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) Because of the web interface, what you or anyone else say in "your" NG is hardly private. Many if not most view any post no matter which NG it's in. You may think you "get away" with stuff, but that's only an illusion. -John (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) Richard: In some ways, yes, but I see your point and it is a valid one. I'm glad SOMEONE is defending free speech, even though the TOS is clearly stated. I also had a good chuckle-you're a funny guy, I liked your immediate response to Tim :) (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Buddhism
|
|
I'll adopt Ben’s Zen state-of-mind to answer this question: (...) And illusion? Perhaps… But if the group collectively embraces it, it becomes our reality. And in this organization we dictate the state of the matrix. Therefore, if we should so (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) It displays all groups to which the message will be posted in the authorisation mail. They're above the actual message, on a line titled "Newsgroups" (...) They're already there, as well. Right up the top. Though many people (including myself, (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) Here's one 8?) ROSCO (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) But you’re an honorary Member! After all, you took part in the 1st rtlToronto Train Event!!! --==Richard==-- (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) Yep. I could have. I could have thought, 'why waste my time' and totally disregard the concern I have for the betterment of LUGNET. (...) If it isn't entirely obvious, I don't have much regard for this slippery slope opinion. This isn't (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) Tim, I understand your good intentions. I think no one is doubting that Iain and Richard were against TOS. And you're right, we're all the guests of Todd/Suzanne or whoever is running Lugnet these days. However, you also have no authority for (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) Of course we know you, Ross! Calum (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) Certainly I understand I have no authority in your NG. But, the TOS does have an authority in your NG. The comments were crossposted to a mainstream part of LUGNET too. While I would still find the post distasteful, I would have less of a (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) True, but in their defense, anyone using the web interface has the ability to filter out that which they don't want to see. At that point only crossposting would enable you to see what they were talking about. -Dave (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | On the lighter side.... was (Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general)
|
|
<BIG SNIP> (...) Did anyone else notice that Chris has mentioned trains before robots..... Jeff VW (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Calum Tsang writes: <snip> (...) But the problem is that she shouldn't HAVE to say so each and every time. LUGNET is a community. As such, community members ought to be able to help each other out in conforming to the (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: On the lighter side.... was (Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general)
|
|
(...) Oh I did notice that, but somehow didn't reply! Mayhaps Chris is coming over to the fence where I'm always sitting. Dave (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) Oooh, my second posting to a Larry post (too bad it has to be about this issue :( for I appreciate Larry, and Tim and everyone I've had dialogues with and or/read on LUGNet... In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Tim Courtney writes: (...) Both are (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
|
|
(...) I don't wish to add any fuel to this mixture, but do want to make a point that might help present another point of view. I read LUGNET through the web interface almost 100% of the time. I have no filtering enabled, so I see every newsgroup. I (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Honorary member!
|
|
(...) Cool! You guys are always welcome at Aussie events, too! I won't feel so worried about lurking here any more! (...) And a great event it was too! A big hello (and have fun!) to all for Train3 this weekend! ROSCO (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: On the lighter side.... was (Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general)
|
|
(...) WRONG!!!!!! that is all. I had a HUGE reply to this that slashed through several other posts and even used some colourful language. BUT i erased it. Chris Pretend that people from outside the GTA will read this. OOPs, no need to pretend. (22 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: On the lighter side.... was (Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general)
|
|
(...) Fine. Leave me sitting *alone*, all by myself, on the fence between the trainees and the techies... <*snif*> Dave Pretend that I'm not feeling *really* lonely right now in my own little LEGO world ;) (22 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
