General Discussions about LUGNET : 12627


Administrative / General / 12627	12626 \| 12628

Subject:	Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
Newsgroups:	lugnet.admin.general
Date:	Sun, 17 Apr 2005 20:52:53 GMT
Viewed:	656 times

In lugnet.admin.general, Matthew J. Chiles wrote: > Undoubtedly there are > other interesting threads around Lugnet that should be there and are not. I personally would be more convinced if you could find some threads that SHOULD be there, but aren't. Also include whether those threads have been spotlighted or not. If Lugnet is about LEGO, and LEGO MOCs in particular, I think added weight to MOCs is a fair. Especially since the only messages to really gain spotlights are MOCs or flame-wars. -Lenny

Message has 7 Replies:

		Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
(...) Is LUGNET about MOCs? I thought it was meant to be a place for the LEGO Community to center around. "Where minds connect: You are not alone! LUGNET is home to thousands of LEGO fans of all ages. We are a community which never sleeps...." But (...) (19 years ago, 17-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)

		Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
(...) Is that right? The top four items are now the Brickfest announcement, two on the survey. and one on a mecha contest. Between them they have 36 spotlights ('human recommendations'). Do those 'human recommendations' include the effects of the (...) (19 years ago, 17-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)

		Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
(...) While this would be interesting, I think it's a separate problem. As illustrated in this thread there are postings that make the Spotlight that have no human rating applied to them. Since the Top Stories list has a cap on the number of (...) (19 years ago, 18-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)

		Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
(...) The best example by far was the Toy Fair. Larry posted his pictures to .announce and to .lego, giving it only a +1 (since .announce is +1 and .lego is -1). He also posted it on a Friday (or so I seem to recall), and IIRC a bunch of MOC's had (...) (19 years ago, 18-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)

		Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
(...) I'm not sure if this is precisely true. Just looking at classic-castle, only because it's much quicker for me to get the stats, there are ~12000 posts in the "castle MOCs" forum and ~8800 posts in the "castle sets" forum. Assuming that (...) (19 years ago, 18-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

		Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
(...) OK, here is one: (URL) is about 36 hours old. When it was about 6 hours old and with several replys I spotlighted it. It still has just one spotlight, but there are now 14 messages in the thread which shows quite a bit of interest. And the (...) (19 years ago, 20-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)

		Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
(...) Hey, Sorry to drag up an old discussion, but I just noticed an example of this. In the past hour I have spotlighted two new creations--(URL) Keith's Sato Plaza> and (URL) James' trolley>--and posted one of my own--(URL) track and field (...) (19 years ago, 19-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
(...) Replying to my own post and I don't think anyone is really looking at this thread anymore anyway, even though it continues to be a "top stories" item. I just wanted to metion that now, 24 hours later, the conditions of the above referenced (...) (19 years ago, 17-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)

12 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search