To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.org.ca.rtltorontoOpen lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Organizations / Canada / rtlToronto / 3299
3298  |  3300
Subject: 
Re: use of anagram fun is bad in lugnet.general
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
Date: 
Wed, 16 Jan 2002 06:02:28 GMT
Viewed: 
709 times
  
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Richard Noeckel writes:
Iian wrote:
How was I supposed to know someone felt it
necissary to tattle to .general.admin?

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.

Yep.  I could have.  I could have thought, 'why waste my time' and totally
disregard the concern I have for the betterment of LUGNET.

(It’s not like the whole newsgroup was about to be spammed by ‘lewd-anagrams!’)
This just totally wastes Suz’ time and makes her deal with irrelevant stuff.
                                                   (OR)
At the most, Tim could have just sent an e-mail presentin’ his distaste for
your statement.
                                          ~But he didn’t!!!!!!!!
(That’s why I took the time to attribute the appropriate anagram to ol’ Timmy!)
                [I thought it mirrored his rash anal-retentive intolerance.]

If it isn't entirely obvious, I don't have much regard for this slippery
slope opinion.  This isn't Richard Noeckel Net.  This is LUGNET.  There are
rules here.  And there are people who want to see this a pleasant place.

You don't own the RTLToronoto group on this server.  On another server,
perhaps.  This one, no.  If it makes me unpopular with a small group of
people to express my concern, so be it.  You are each responsible for your
own actions here.  Yes, freedom of expression is good.  But, not everything
is appropriate expression for LUGNET.  The TOS *and* the LUGNET community
are kid-friendly.  Take it or leave it.

-Tim



Message has 1 Reply:
  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 (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)

Message is in Reply To:
  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’ (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)

33 Messages in This Thread:













Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR