| |
In lugnet.people, Matthew Gerber writes:
> In lugnet.people, Tom Inosanto writes:
> > **Note** I have censored Jesse's post with "@@@"'s to cover the offensive
> > words..
> >
> > In lugnet.people, Jesse Alan Long writes:
> > <snip>
> > > A good example is that I never started a sentence with, "You sorry son of a
> > > b@@@@, go@@@@@, mother fu@@@@@ a@@@@@e!" That sort of sentence is
> > > incredibly rude and also it is not my typical sort of behavior on Lugnet.
> >
> > As well is NOT ALLOWED on Lugnet, this is uncaled fo at any response, and I
> > am offended that you choose to have your war on these boards. See below...
>
> I decided to let that slide in the context it was said...but you are
> correct, Tom.
>
> <snip>
>
> > Jessie, Matt and whoever is dragging this out - Keep in mind you are on a
> > public board - you really need to take this war to private e-mail. Tim had
> > the right idea about mailing you, Tim undersatnds this stuff does not belong
> > on these boards. I, as I would assume others are tired of reading this war,
> > so I ask you to take it to email, where it belongs! You should be banned for
> > using the language you have decided to use, as it is a direct violation of
> > the TOS here on Lugnet. Ad if you have any quams, email me!
>
> E-mail, too, has failed...sadly. I've been privvy to some of the mail, and
> it hasn't worked any better than words here.
>
> But Tom, this IS a public board, and only Jesse has chosen to respond to
> this particular thread in these ways. The rest is acceptable, especially in
> .people. This isn't (well, WASN'T) a flame war. It was never intended to be
> (and I said so previously, to Geordan).
>
> My failing here is that I have allowed myself to be goaded into trying to
> keep some lines of communication open on this subject...that's completely my
> fault...but what I have written seems to have fallen on deaf ears...as have
> the words of everyone else. That's too bad...there have been some good,
> salient points made. Oh well...
>
> Matt
Why argue any more online? Does any person on Lugnet even KNOW exactly what
started this arguement? I think that constructive criticism (which I have
been trying to do very strongly to most people online) should be allowed on
Lugnet. I believe that we should go back to the basics of why we were here
in the first place, not to argue or to prove who is better than who on
Lugnet. This sort of attitude started the Hatfield and McCoy incident in
Kentucky, let us not start a similar matter on Lugnet.
I think that honesty should also be allowed with creations on Lugnet.
Perhaps I was wrong in being angry over people having names that I had
chosen for space craft or similar names to my space craft. Even The LEGO
Company used similar names for their creations so I figured in my mind,
"That is immature, let people name their space craft any way they want on
Lugnet. LEGO is a toy of unlimited imagination and it should always be
regarded as such a product of our lives."
I must also concur that I also never intended for this to become a "flame
war," as was probably the intention of Geordan. Matt, as I said to Tom, of
which he did not know, Tim did not need to send me that sort of language in
his mail, whether it was on Lugnet or on a private account, of which the
latter he sent me. I only wanted to prove to Tim and other people that it
was immature to post such messages to people as well as rude and immature
and that even I do not send letters that have those words (which I
distinctly said that I do not speak those words on Lugnet or in my private
mail accounts) and I only wanted to prove that to Tim and other people who
thought that doing such actions would be considered a good idea. I also did
not want them to get into trouble but for me, it seems that there is a
hypocritical standard on Lugnet and people that act in a similar manner that
I act in seem to get into trouble because of a vengeful reaction to a letter.
I would say, "Make love, not war," but I believe that simply showing off our
LEGO creations is what we SHOULD accomplish on Lugnet and not to tear down
other people. We have torn down each other and for what ultimate purpose,
to act like the bubble headed jerks that we are in life? I have a right to
think differently from other people online and likewise you also possess the
right but when we violate each other, there will be problems, Matt, and
other people who read this message.
The essence of this letter is to make a mutual peace on Lugnet and to set
new standards of constructive criticism for personal LEGO creations on
Lugnet. I hope that you can agree to this letter, Matt. This is my attempt
to become civil and peaceful on Lugnet.
Jesse Long
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Apology for Jesse Long
|
| -snipped J.A.L.'s usual BS- (...) And what creations have you shown us here on LUGNET? None. You can't install MLCAD on your computer and build your models on the computer. What are you, 20 years-old? Wow, I know young teenages who can run MLCAD on (...) (23 years ago, 5-Aug-01, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Apology for Jesse Long
|
| (...) I decided to let that slide in the context it was said...but you are correct, Tom. <snip> (...) E-mail, too, has failed...sadly. I've been privvy to some of the mail, and it hasn't worked any better than words here. But Tom, this IS a public (...) (23 years ago, 5-Aug-01, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
26 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
|
|
|
|
