Subject:
|
Re: Lugnet: WAKE UP!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.people
|
Date:
|
Tue, 4 Apr 2006 00:15:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
10245 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.people, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.people, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
--SNIP--
| |
I see nothing inconsistent here. Eric should get an indefinite timeout
until he requests cancels on the posts that clearly are over the line,
acknowledges he erred and that the ToS does apply to him, and apologises
for causing part of the ruckus... plus some (fairly sizable in his case)
definite amount as a reminder that he should not trifle. I would not
support a permanent irrevocable ban for Eric, at this time, because in the
last year, at least, he has not been previously warned. He should have
been, but he wasn’t.
|
As I mentioned the first response to Eric, he has in fact been
told before.
|
John’s not an admin.
|
Nevertheless, if you read the rest of the thread, Eric did make a
commitment of sorts not to do it
again.
So he either willfully disregarded that, or simply forgot, when posting this
latest auction. Either one doesn’t fill me with any confidence that an apology
from him now will have any long term meaning whatsoever. I’m not advocating a
permanent ban, but neither do I expect things to be any different when he
returns.
Allister
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Lugnet: WAKE UP!
|
| (...) John's not an admin. A PERMANENT ban would still be shotgun against puppy without prior warning, IMHO. A temporary ban is what apparently has been imposed though. (wasn't very clear at first, still isn't very clear although it is somewhat (...) (18 years ago, 3-Apr-06, to lugnet.people, FTX)
|
42 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
