 | | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) I think that's what started this all (again) in the first place. None of you has any respect for each other. If you were my kids, you'd *all* be going to bed without dinner. I don't know any of the parties involved. I've never met any of you. (...) (18 years ago, 14-Aug-06, to lugnet.people.support)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) ...or for the rest of us who read Lugnet, the vast majority of whom I would bet don't care one jot about these individuals nor their petty reasons for lobbing mud at one another here. (...) I mostly agree with you, Elroy, except that I'd go so (...) (18 years ago, 14-Aug-06, to lugnet.people.support)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
--SNIP-- (...) Although I fully intend to ignore Eric as much as possible in future and wasn't the one who brought this to Lugnet in the first place I have to give some advice to you and others who complain about pointless flamewars: don't read (...) (18 years ago, 15-Aug-06, to lugnet.people.support)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
In lugnet.people.support, Timothy Gould wrote: <snip> (...) Well, I do admit as of late that I've been slacking in my postings... That said, I was #11 for post count in 2003, and thereabouts for a few years... (...) The issue is that it shouldn't (...) (18 years ago, 15-Aug-06, to lugnet.people.support)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) Hi Dave, Just to clarify this isn't directed at you. You argued it should never have been brought here which I fully agree with. You never once said it should be deleted or locked which is where I take issue. Tim (18 years ago, 15-Aug-06, to lugnet.people.support)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) If your comments were directed at me, then you are absolutely right. I don't post to the forums much. That doesn't mean that I don't read them. Anyone who knows me in person knows that I'm generally a pretty quiet guy. It says a lot that I've (...) (18 years ago, 15-Aug-06, to lugnet.people.support)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) Hi Elroy, I hope that my comment didn't come out harsher than it was intended. I'm pretty passionate about free speech and probably come across ruder than I intend to. (...) I agree with this. To be honest I really regret adding that comment. (...) (18 years ago, 15-Aug-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
In lugnet.people.support, Elroy Davis wrote: [snip] (...) [this entire incident aside] I'm not sure if thread locking is even do-able. I think it was talked about a few months ago (privately). Jerry would know if it's possible, and then it would be (...) (18 years ago, 15-Aug-06, to lugnet.people.support, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) Okay, here's the big issue: LUGNET is based on an NNTP server, and the news system does not support such a thing as thread locking, since threads are only made up by matching subjects (and some header info) in the very first place. Enhancing (...) (18 years ago, 15-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) What about making the server reject any new posts to a thread, either through the web or NNTP? It again wouldn't be the most elegant solution, but I'd imagine it would be doable. (...) I think the easiest way would be adding some negative (...) (18 years ago, 15-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) Hi Jerry, Would it be possible to move threads? If so you could have a naughty threads section .off-topic.threads or something similar which people could ignore and which would remove the problem for NNTP and web users? Tim (18 years ago, 15-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) Good point, Jeff - actually something like that appears ideal: User opinions are very important when it comes to the spotlight feature, so we probably want exactly this option: To be able to move a topic out of the spotlight upon request, or (...) (18 years ago, 15-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) I don't think NNTP supports moving either, but even if it did, it would be unlikely to work, as people using SMTP/NNTP already have the message with its old headers, including the newsgroups, so when they reply it would still go to the old (...) (18 years ago, 15-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) I really think this is something that LUGNET members can sort out... if they really want it sorted out. 'Worst of the worst' has three spotlights... and it is in the main page highlights. How difficult can it be to spotlight ten things more (...) (18 years ago, 15-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX) !!
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
Agreed! (but not spotlighted!) I just went through announce.moc and highlit a few items, maybe we can push the unpleasentness off the front page. (18 years ago, 16-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) Agreed. As a new member with high expectations from this most "friendliest" of locales, I would like to let you all know that viewed from "the outside"(i.e. folks with little or no Lugnet experience) this type of garbage does not speak well of (...) (18 years ago, 16-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) No, I think you're wrong and users need a way to counter spotlighting in cases like this. Your post is another example of why a post needs an option to downgrade it. Some people who agree with you have gone and highlighted it. Now it looks (...) (18 years ago, 16-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) If people now highlight your post they are saying they agree with you rather than Richie. Thus his system would work. With a negative spotlight you allow people to treat things negatively without giving a valid alternative which is needlesly (...) (18 years ago, 16-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) No, you misunderstand. You spotlight stuff you want to see spotlighted. Spotlight a post of a MOC that you like, or an event you're interested in. You don't have to spotlight a "counter view". If you don't want my post appearing in the (...) (18 years ago, 16-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) Not quite, and it's not my system - it's the system we have now, and it's a system that will work if we choose to use it. If the community doesn't want this sort of stuff highlighting, then they need to highlight the things that they want to (...) (18 years ago, 16-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) I think I agree with some of this - my point, Tim, was that spotlighting shouldn't end up being used to vote on an issue because it just forces more dross into the spotlighted list. If someone thinks something is worth highlighting, but a lot (...) (18 years ago, 17-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Worst of the worst
|
|
(...) The Spotlight feature has been in place for what, five years or more now? And "petty aguments" and the like *consistantly* get in the front page spotlight. I think this is proof enough the current system doesn't work. You're saying "all people (...) (18 years ago, 17-Aug-06, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX) !
|
