On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Dan <[email protected]> wrote:
> At 5:58 AM +0000 2/23/2010, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote:
>>
>> What does that have to do with the topic of morphing/thread
>> highjacking ? I did not read the webcam threads as I was not
>> interested in the subject line.
>
> 1. The original thread's topic, webcam issues, was on-topic to g3-5.
First of all why are you using my reply as the basis here. I don't
care about webcam issues i care about the issue I addressed my remarks
toward. You and Kyle can work out whether webcams was OT for the G
list or not. i have no interest. why drag me into it?
>
> 2. The original complaint was that that thread drifted from webcam to HD
> issues.
>
No, webcams were not mentioned in the post at the top of this thread.
I just looked at it. It is very easy to check as gmail keeps threads
in order. I highly recommend such a mail utility as it keeps things in
order and there is less confusion.
> 3. That thread was NOT hijacked. Noone jumped into the thread, taking it
> off onto a totally different topic, or trying to get us to debug THEIR
> problem. The conversation simply, logically, drifted from one security
> paranoia to another. I should mention also that it was the OP that
> initiated the drift by mentioning the HD issues, not some 3rd party!
I did not read it. What counts is that jonas Lopez asked for a " no
thread morphing rule."
>
> 4. This thread is actually bogus, because the original thread was drifted
> by the OP, not anyone else much less hijacked.
Again, I did not read the webcam thread. I cannot comment on that,
But since it is my post that you use at the top on this post how about
sticking to the issue of this thread ?
If you wan to respond to the logic of Jonas original poat or the
webcam thread why not use those as the quoted passage you start with.
Again why drag my comments into your disagreement with Jonas and Kyle
about the webcam being OT and whether THAT thread was " morphed " ( to
use Jonas term. Why use my post to try to discredit and discount
Jonas' concerns ?
>
> 5. The complaint about *this* thread is that complaints about the list
> rules are only on-topic on the LEMLists list, and beyond the one-off scope
> of all the other LEM lists.
If you read closely you would see that that is what i have repeatedly
requested that the Nannies or Dan Knight clarify. I triesd to go along
with your comment about LEMlists Group list. I even joined although NO
posts from it have arrived in my inbox. But I also noted the disparity
between what you claim is the ONLY venue of list business discussion
and the fact that the link to join is hidden and has only about 1% of
total LEM listers as members of a list that is by your emphasis of
critical importance to ALL LEM listers.
Either LEMlists Group list " IS " as you say the ONLY place for list
business discussion or as Kyle states an amount of list business IS
allowed. OR the rules are interpreted on a minute to minute basis.
If it is the second case then your chastisement of Jonas ala;
" It is actually quite ironic that you accuse others of disrupting the
list when you too are in fact in the wrong polluting this list with a
ot post that belongs on the lemlists list. Nice going, hypocrit. "
is unwarranted.
>
> Really, in the grand scheme of things, none of the above matters. So I have
> an idea... Let's all just move on. END these dumb threads. Don't reply,
> even with "yea me too". Just let them die. Let's find something else to
> complain about, er a discuss.
End this one you mean.? BEFORE we find out what the Mom and Nannies
want in terms of WHERE to discuss list business ?
Before a legitimate question is fully answered?
Yeah, Vampire shows are all the rage these days.
--
Adrian D'Alessio aka; Fluxstringer
[email protected]
http://www.facebook.com/FluxStringer
http://www.linkedin.com /in/fluxstreamcommunications
http://flux-influx.blogspot.com/
http://fluxdreams.designbinder.com/
http://twitter.com/FluxStringer
http://mog.com/FluxMuse
--
You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for
those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs.
The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette
guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
