• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Lost TA members

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
blade_47-

<< If they're getting the email addresses from DNET they need to either get in trouble for it or we all should be able to do it. If they gathered the addresses from other means then this is a good example of why we needed to do the same. >>

I agree 100%!😎

Osmo.
 
I agree that we should seek a Dnet solution first. If that does not resolve the issue we can consider alternatives as we see fit then (and only then).

I had to read through this a couple of times to see where this was going. At first I thought a flame war had started but I think somehow that was avoided. I sure hope so! I seem to remember sincere apologies being thrown around the last time this issue was brought forward (regardless if this is the same issue or not) and I would hope they were indeed sincere. I think most know there is disagreement about emailing amongst us, I have learned a great deal about this forum as a whole through that subject matter!:|😱----🙂. I'm sure we can all state our opinions about a subject without turning it to personal attacks.

That said, I pray Dnet resolves this issue! Must be something about the times to be divided on issues!😉
 
I see no need to get &quot;permission&quot; from Dnet to try and fix THEIR screwup. If I didn't visit this forum regularly, I would not have known of the solution for the problem, and Team AnandTech would be MISSING 672,000 blocks right now.

There are many people who don't visit here, and we have every right to make sure they are notified by whatever means necessary that, due to no fault of theirs or the team's, they are no longer participating.

Russ, NCNE
 
Russ-

<< ...we have every right to make sure they are notified by whatever means necessary... >>

I kindly reply that we don't.

Osmo.
 
Poof...

Thanks for the feedback. I will try it tonight when I get home. If it works fine, then I will be cracking blocks again starting later this evening.

 
dennilfloss-

I'm not sure, the ballot was confusing but we now know who the unruley Republicans are amongst us!😉

Osmo.

(intentional misspelling)
 
Well, I, for one, sure ain't one of them. As I have pointed numerous times in OT, I'm a law &amp; order Canadian Liberal! 🙂
 
Ugg, here we go again.:| I definately think we need to ask permission. If no one has any objections, I'll send an email on behalf of the team, to Decibel, asking for permission to use the collected addys to send a 1 time email to those people who were still actively cracking for TA before the accident. It'll be noted in the email to Decibel that we'll delete the list as soon as we send the emails, that we'll be using a t*a*.com addy to send the email from(still awaiting word from Mika), and that we understand if he says no. I'll probably also show him the email I plan on sending(a minor alteration of DanC's email), so that he can be sure of our intensions. If he says yes, I'll attempt to have it sent ASAP; otherwise, we'll just have to assimilate someone else.😀
 
Fair enough Virge - feel free to take literary license.
If you are far enough up the dnet list to ACTUALLY get them to respond to e-mail from you (they ignore most of the rest of us) - I'd appreciate your pointed asking if there is any prohibition against our communicating on a regular basis with our members. Let's put the bloody issue to rest once and for all. I'm willing to bet a dime they don't even care.
 
Osmo, not to beat a dead horse or anything, but you are not being consistent. At first you indicated it would be &quot;OK&quot;, more or less, to contact the people who were dropped by Dnet from the team, but not OK to contact the bottom 400.

Russ' post was clearly directed at the need to contact the Dnet dropouts by whatever means necessary (email, I suppose, I don't think Russ uses smoke signals) and you say &quot;I kindly reply that we don't.&quot;.

It's a moot point anyway, the contacts have been made. I was one of the Dnet dropouts and even though I had already rejoined, I appreciated the effort to notify me. You're taking this stuff way too seriously, DanC was quite civil (for him, at least 🙂) and there was no reason for the &quot;bite me&quot; comment. We're just trying to get active members notified they were kicked off the team by Dnet, that's a far cry from spamming strangers to join RC5.
 
JimMc-

I'm being very consistant actually. My comments earlier were not to condone the idea of using DNET lists to contact TA members to resolve the issue of participants being dropped from the team. In fact, it is just a matter of me being tired of bringing the point up so many times now. But when the suggestions of taking this opportunity to follow through with the earlier plans to contact past members was tossed into the mix, I decided not to bite my lip any further. Regardless of Russ's or any TA members intention, we do not have the right to do what every we feel like regarding email addresses taken from DNET stats. As for my comment directed toward DanC, it is justified in my opinion. I'm tired of being labeled as negative when I present an opposing view point to one that DanC agrees with. I definitly am not taking RC5 seriously, but actions that have potential consequences on my team, I do take seriously.

Osmo.

[Edit]spelling[/Edit]
 
Everyone please note that I've resisted the temptation to lash out. I will however state that the opinion that I've expressed IS FAR from being only mine. Dnet has a curious habit of ignoring requests for a ruling on this issue.

I could have taken the addresses and moved forward. I didn't.
I also didn't engage in a flame-war when I could have.

Once again, I'm going to call for a positive spin and a direct pointed ruling from dnet on not only correcting their foul-up - but settling this ridiculous dispute once and for all.
 
Easy solution. Ignore email. Use private messaging. It purpose is, after all, to allow one AnandTech member to contact another privately.
 
Denis -
works extraordinarily well for you too. However... If a person doesn't frequent the forum - then what?

I already tried clairvoyance with limited results. Russ used smoke signals. Train tried messages in a bottle. All that's left is e-mail and random phone calls.
 


<< we do not have the right to do what every we feel like regarding email addresses taken from DNET stats. >>



I kindly reply that, because of THEIR screwup, we do in this case.

Russ, NCNE
 
Russ-

I see now, it's ok to make up our own rules when the situation suits us. What the fsck am I worried about? /end sarcasm

Osmo.
 
Humm, the plot just got a heck of a lot thicker. Anyone mind trying to Dcypher(sorry, bad pun😉) what Moose means from the reply he sent me?



<< Need you guys to make a call on this. Is there any way we can correct the
problem on our end perhaps?

paul >>

 


<< Need you guys to make a call on this. >>



Or, to put it another way: Do what you need to do.

Russ, NCNE
 
Sounds like they are willing to fix it on their ends as well, no work needed on our end. But then again, I read the second sentence.😉

Osmo.
 
Virge Dnet can email everybody and make them aware..

that is the correct solution, the 'average' cracker doesnt even know
to go look in the .plans, much less how

Dale
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top