LEGO TECHNIC : 15557


Technic / 15557

Technic sidebar thingie —Bob Parker

Seems to be some link problems with the Sidebar here. Do we need a Co-Curator? ;-) (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.technic, FTX)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —David Eaton

(...) Have you tried contacting the curator of the group? (Assuming you're talking about broken links?) Otherwise, it would appear that the images for Eric Sophie's models (and ONLY Eric Sophie's models) were explicitly set to be a "broken" image: (...) (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Timothy Gould

(...) Given Eric' recent use of DMCA notices to protect his copyrights I don't think you can neccessarily say that it is not suitable. Such an action protects Lugnet from recieving such notices for breaching his copyright by linking to his images. (...) (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —David Eaton

(...) Well, I admit I wasn't aware of Eric's recent stint with copyright notice issues, however, I still think this action was inappropriate. First off, it doesn't protect Lugnet to any large degree because Eric's posts specifically reference the (...) (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Ross Crawford

(...) Dave, don't bother. I did it, and I emailed Rene, telling him that I had done it, that it would be changed back in a few days, and to let me know if he had any problem with it. Apparently that email didn't get to you. Have you been given (...) (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —David Eaton

(...) Nope, I was out of the loop on that one, and if I had been in it I probably would've voiced my opinion that it shouldn't happen. I am glad to hear that you talked to Rene about it beforehand, though. (...) I was granted access to change (...) (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Ross Crawford

(...) No point now - I was going to put it back anyway, probably later today. I still think it would be good to clarify your position WRT changing content, and add your email to the admin sidebar (and anyone else who has similar access). ROSCO (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Dan Boger

(...) Well, define what's an admin? I have access as well, but I don't consider myself an admin. Admins implies responsibility as well as access - if someone's email is on that list, it means it's ok to contact them if you have any sort of adminish (...) (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Ross Crawford

(...) I think this current misunderstanding is a case in point. Wasn't there once an admin@lugnet.com email that forwarded to all the current admins? I think such a tool would be useful, users only have 1 address to contact, and you guys can argue (...) (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —David Eaton

(...) I think what seems to be missing is the description of what global curators should do and what they should *not* do. This is the first time to my knowledge that an instance like this has happened (where one curator has overwritten another (...) (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —

Rene Hoffmeister

(...) Hi all and sundry :-) ROSCO: Probably your email made it into my spam folder, sorry! I haven't read such an email and therefore don't know what happened, and whether I would have endorsed it beforehand or not. Well, seems that we all survived (...) (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Ross Crawford

(...) Note that until then, the traffic link is still on every other page besides the main page. ROSCO (17 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Chris Phillips

(...) Am I the only one who is bothered by the total anarchy on display here? A LUGNET curator abuses his priviledges in order to harass another member, and the official response is "no harm done?" Ross, you owe Eric an apology, public and sincere. (...) (17 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general) !!

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —John Neal

(...) Nope. (...) Yep. JOHN (17 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Mark Rideout

(...) same answers as John -mark (17 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Anders Isaksson

(...) Definitely not. I'm deeply disturbed by the actions of Rosco (*and* others). It looks like lugnet is falling apart, and he's helping. I was also astonished by the lack of administrator reaction to Rosco's actions. Even if we only see half a (...) (17 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —

Rene Hoffmeister

(...) Hi Chris, thank you very much for your thoughts. Be sure I've given this whole issue careful consideration. But as far as I can see, there was a lot of healthy discussion and I'm pretty sure some people will rethink their futur behaviour. I (...) (17 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Kelly McKiernan

In lugnet.admin.general, Rene Hoffmeister wrote: - snip - (...) Rene, I understand your reluctance to pursue administrative repurcussions in this latest flare-up. Unfortunately, perception of administrative bias is as damaging as actual bias. A lack (...) (17 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general) !!

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Aaron M. Sneary

(...) I strongly agree with Kelly's response above. The role of administrator is a priveledge that should be bestowed upon trustworthy and honorable people. The priveledge should be revoked if used outside of the purvue of responsible administrative (...) (17 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —David Eaton

(...) So, you'd like to see a public reprimand from Rene, and/or a public apology from Ross? I think at this point, it's clear that: - What Ross did was not acceptable (in my book certainly, and I assume in Rene's as well). - There was (...) (17 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Kelly McKiernan

(...) Nothing so dramatic; and I've seen (URL) Rene's recent post>, so that's settled. By "core issue" I was referring to a perception of potential future admin malfeasance. While the immediate flurry has been beaten to death, I remain unconvinced (...) (17 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Ross Crawford

(...) No, it bothers me because (as happened in this case) an email to the Lugnet admins does not reach ALL Lugnet admins, and one of the admins that was "out of the loop" reverted my changes. While not a problem in this case, I can see a potential (...) (17 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Chris Phillips

(...) It seems that NONE of the admins received your e-mail, because the implication I've been reading is that NONE of them would have told you to go ahead. But the point is, you shouldn't need the admins to tell you when you are crossing that line, (...) (17 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Ross Crawford

(...) Well, that's even worse, and should be fixed. (...) No, that's a different point entirely. (...) I don't think anyone had a problem with Dave reverting the pics, do you? (...) At least (URL) one person did>, and preferred to email the admins (...) (17 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Chris Phillips

(...) A point which is still apparently lost on you? (...) So you sent e-mail to the admins, and then in the absence of a response you assumed that you had administrative approval to alter somebody else's content? No problem. Sure. (...) Under the (...) (17 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Ross Crawford

(...) No. The admins will determine if I crossed any line, and take action as necessary. (...) Firstly, that has nothing to do with the point I was making about wanting ALL admins to be "in the loop" when someone "contacts admin". And secondly, the (...) (17 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Geoffrey Hyde

"Chris Phillips" <drvegetable@comcast.net> wrote in message news:JDqEKz.JzF@lugnet.com... (...) Chris ... I think you are trying to do little more than argue an argument to it's unarguable end. That is why Ross Crawford redirected it to .debate (...) (17 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Chris Phillips

(...) Unfortunately, I believe you are correct. (...) I don't know his motives any better than I assume you do, but it seems to me that he moved it to .debate in order to marginalize my attempts to steer this discussion back toward the central issue (...) (17 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Peter F. Guenther

(...) So it's OK for you to abuse administrative privilege, as long as only one or two people are bothered by it? Especially if one of the two is a person that a significant people on LUGNET feel it's OK to bully? I just have to post here to say I (...) (17 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX) !

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Timothy P. Smith

(...) Gimme a break. This is a prank gone wrong, not an abuse of power. Deleting all of a member's posts, or breaking links in a way that couldn't be restored, that would be an abuse. This was actually a little bit funny (and a little mean, I (...) (17 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX) !

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —

Rene Hoffmeister

This is directed to all people who would like to see sanctions against Ross. (...) I am so sorry that I haven't received Ross' and Eric's emails regarding this matter (both sent before Bob's posting), because if I would have received one of them or (...) (17 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.curators)

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Ross Crawford

(...) Thank you for clarifying your position Rene. I also think it's worth clarifying my statement above. As a curator at Lugnet, I will try my best to act responsibly, and I cannot envisage any set of circumstances that would cause me to ever (...) (17 years ago, 21-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general) !

Re: Technic sidebar thingie —Chris Phillips

(...) Thank you, Rene, for issuing a formal statement about the resolution of this incident, and to Dave for filling in some details. In retrospect, this was the missing link which publicly clarifies the official stance on this issue. It is good to (...) (17 years ago, 21-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar malicious behavior —Eric Sophie

(...) Exactly. Thank you Dave. Bob you also knew about this and want to see how much of a reaction this would stir. Ross, if you are going to play games as a curator, you should resign, or have your status revoked. yours, Eric Sophie ===...=== Sent (...) (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.technic)

Re: Technic sidebar malicious behavior —David Eaton

Eric, I'm glad to hear your position, although I'd appreciate it if you recused yourself from the public discussion as I'm concerned that it will only agitate things further. DaveE (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar malicious behavior —

Rene Hoffmeister

(...) Strange, haven't received this one too. Ross, have you sent your email also on that date? -Rene (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar malicious behavior —Ross Crawford

(...) Yes, 10th Feb local time. ROSCO (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar malicious behavior —

Rene Hoffmeister

(...) Verdammt. I will use a second forwarding to an external archiving inbox in the future. -Rene (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: Technic sidebar malicious behavior —Bob Parker

(...) I have requested that Lugnet cancel my original message. I assume cancelling the entire thread is undoable? I am sorry for my lame attempt at humor and apologise to anyone who may be affected, including esp. Ross and Eric. Bob (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: Technic sidebar malicious behavior —

Rene Hoffmeister

(...) Hi Bob, as mentioned via email, cancelling your post wouldn't make any sense and deleting the whole thread isn't an option. Anyway, I'm not a friend of deleting anything simply because it becomes a little bit unpleasing. This only would cause (...) (17 years ago, 12-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: Technic sidebar malicious behavior —Allister McLaren

(...) Well done Eric. You continue to amaze me. By 'lawyering up' over something as petty as this you've made yourself look an even bigger idiot than before, something I didn't think possible. And it's 'copyright', which should give you a clue about (...) (17 years ago, 13-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

malicious behavior —Eric Sophie

(...) -snip- As per the LUGNET Terms of Use, I object to your name calling and trollish behavior: "Do not post or transmit any unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, racist, violence glorifying (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys

In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Sophie wrote: <snip> (...) Seriously, Eric--walk away from this--you're better than this. Dave K (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)

Re: malicious behavior —Soren Roberts

(...) Actually, the available evidence indicates that he's, you know, not. So I think it's probably better to appeal to the people poking him. And since I used to be one of them, who better to deliver the message? Guys, he's only worth so much of (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys

(...) Actually, you'd be qrong--the available evidence is that he, you know, is better than this. However, being sniped at by, well, many, many people, is grating and I can't blame someone for lashing out. That said, I fully realize that his lashing (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX) !

Re: malicious behavior —Timothy Gould

(...) I've stayed out of this thread until this comment. There is no evidence that Eric is in anyway better than this. There is plenty of evidence that he is not. Just because people get a rise out of him doesn't mean he is well-behaved. I had (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: malicious behavior —Eric Sophie

Tim, what was the last thing I did wrong? Refresh our memories and back up your story. Then tell me what any of this has to do with you or the Technic Side bar and Ross's actions. Since you like to molest my images, having broke the law several (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: malicious behavior —Timothy Gould

(...) Eric, The last thing you did wrong was to submit a DMCA image against me for an image the wasn't breaching your copyright. The image was legal. As I have explained to you by email it is called Fair Use for parody. That happened a few days ago (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford

(...) And the American Government... (URL) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Tim's beef behavior —Eric Sophie

(...) -Snip- (...) -snip- (...) I bow to your awesomeness. Ever think to ask for the images? That was "Outside" LUGNET, now What'd I do "On" LUGNET? Again, bowing to your awesomeness. (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Tim's beef behavior —Timothy Gould

(...) Why bother? I was legally allowed to use them and given your typical behaviour I find it very unlikely you would volunteer to let me use them to poke fun at you. You can twist and turn all you like but what you did was morally wrong in my (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Tim's beef behavior —Eric Sophie

(...) I stand before your awesomeness. I yeild oh great brick master Tim. For your awesomeness is so great how can I build ye. The bricks are to small, I am afraid I can not compete. \\\...\\\ (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Timothy Gould wrote: <snip> (...) I couldn't give a rats ass about DMCA, 'fair usage', 'freedom of speech' or '1st ammendment rights' or whatever people are going on about now--it's all obfuscating the actual issue. (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: malicious behavior —Eric Sophie

(...) (*this is such a joke, I am just having fun in the way I transcribe the events*) Righgght! Brilliant, and upon further research one can plainly see, that another party, usual suspect, utters a complaint unto Eric Sophie's person, there by (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: malicious behavior —Allister McLaren

(...) I think you should start writing in English first. (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: malicious behavior —Eric Sophie

(...) Ahh in my haste I indeed make aaa huge gramatical error, look at that! You are so kind to point it oout, you are so awesome. You are so cool! Mega bow to your awesomeness. You made that Roo-Mech one time, it was so cool. (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: malicious behavior —Timothy Gould

(...) --snip-- (...) If you think that Eric deserves an apology then perhaps you should apologise to him. Since you had as much to do with the original issue as I did then you owe him an apology as much as I do. Furthermore I've never argued that (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys

(...) Once again obfuscation--my replies to your comments-- 'I’ve stayed out of this thread until this comment. There is no evidence that Eric is in anyway better than this. There is plenty of evidence that he is not. Just because people get a rise (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Figure it out —Eric Sophie

(...) You still as a fellow Lego Fan, took another LUGNET member's pictures repeatedly from Brickshelf to use in a mean spirited manner is completely uncool for what ever your reasons. Until You, Kevoh, Jude and Soren used my pictures to wage your (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Figure it out —Timothy Gould

(...) --snip-- (...) Thank you for your apology. I too am sorry I sent you the profane image yesterday (and for what it's worth it was never made public and I'd deleted it from online long before I wrote to you). You are however completely wrong (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Figure it out —Eric Sophie

(...) It is at this time we should remember the sacrifices made by Communitity minded hero Lar+ , for in his zeal to make LUGNET a better place, sometimes over did it. Same applies to me as to yourself and a few others. Let us be mindful of brother (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Figure it out —John Neal

(...) No. It is at this time that you should leave Larry's name out of your psychedelic blathering and just STFU already. JOHN (17 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX) !

Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys

(...) I had a whole beautiful (if I do so say myself) exposition here but somehow the page refreshed and it all went 'bye bye'! So I start again, and I've noticed from past experiences, that the second time through is never as good as the first one. (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: malicious behavior —Timothy Gould

(...) I'm sorry but I still feel that your choice to single out Eric as being "better than this" was implying that others weren't. Eric's actions lately imply that he is in no way better than this. This latest incident was started by Eric (off (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford

(...) To be clear, I was never threatened with legal action. A DMCA notification was served against Northstar (host of jlug.net) regarding pictures linked from jlug.net (but hosted by maj.com). It was Northstar that was obliged to remove the link, (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: malicious behavior —Timothy Gould

(...) Sorry. I meant to say Al. Tim (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys

In lugnet.admin.general, Timothy Gould wrote: <snip> (...) That wasn't my conscious intent at the beginning, but thinking about it now--Others were provoking him. You're right--they weren't better than him. Sorry if the truth hurts, but there the (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Re: illogical behavior ;) —Timothy Gould

--snip-- I think this entire argument can be put down to a disagreement over what evidence is applicable to the use in the argument. I think you're as unlikely to convince me that your choices are valid as I am to convince you that mine are. We are (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: illogical behavior ;) —David Koudys

(...) Here's the thing--my justification for 'choosing evidence', if you wish to call it that, is like anytrhing else So here's a hypothetical situation-- Bob had a pretty 'transgressive' start to life. He had gotten into some unlawful mischief in (...) (17 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: illogical behavior ;) —Timothy Gould

(...) Dave, Your analogy is incorrect. It would be correct if Bob had done something in another town and then someone in the town hall had abused Bob for his actions in the other town, Bob had defended himself, James had said Bob was reformed and (...) (17 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: illogical behavior ;) —David Koudys

(...) huh?? The analogy was as close to apt as I had the time to make--Eric (being Bob) had committed transgressions on LUGNET in the past for which he was 'officially' forgiven. Now smomeone maliciosly attacked Eric, and people have chimed in (...) (17 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: illogical behavior ;) —Bob Parker

(...) Did you have to use "Bob"? It's not THAT common of a name, is it?... ;-) (17 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: illogical behavior ;) —David Koudys

(...) I have a brother-in-law Bob, a cousin Bob, friends named Bob... almost as common as the Daves I know... I was going to use John Doe or Richard Roe, but somehow Snoopy-as-lawyer kept on running thru my head... Dave K (17 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: illogical behavior ;) —Bob Parker

(...) I was just kidding really - for years, I had two classmates named Robert in my grade school days and then in my HS days, I had 2 other Parkers in my homeroom (they were brother and sister and I ended up sitting between them due to our first (...) (17 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)

Re: illogical behavior ;) —John Neal

(...) Believe it or don't, my next door neighbor's name is Bob Doe. JOHN (17 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: illogical behavior ;) —Ross Crawford

(...) Until a few years ago, I was able to answer "Yes, he is!" whenever someone said "Bob's your uncle!" ROSCO (17 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: illogical behavior ;) —Thomas Stangl

(...) Well, he could have used Tom, Dick, or Harry, but then I would have had to pipe up ;-) (17 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: illogical behavior ;) —Dave Schuler

(...) You keep out of this, Harry. Dave! (17 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: illogical behavior ;) —John Neal

(...) Go figure; another Dave! Nice of you to drop by, Dave! What, did your a team of small girls in Africa send you a "heads up" of mirth and frivolity? :-) I have a question for you if you have the time. John "Bob" Neal (17 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: malicious behavior —Allister McLaren

(...) You're doing a great job there, Dave. This is the sort of input that Lugnet's been sorely lacking since ++Lar abandonded the community. You just need to turn a few more catchphrases now and then and your transformation will be complete. (17 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)

Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys

(...) I can only aspire to ++Lar status, I coulod never succeed him... I miss a few people around here... Lar being one of 'em, if only because I loved the heated discussions we had... (thoough there were other reasons, to be sure...) Dave K (17 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)

Re: malicious behavior —Allister McLaren

(...) They're big shoes to fill, no doubt. (...) I miss him too, for perhaps slightly different reasons. FWIW, I'd miss Eric if he ever left Lugnet too. (17 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)