| |
LUGNET Admin wrote:
>
> In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Kevin Wilson writes:
> > Larry Pieniazek wrote in message ...
> > > In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Kevin Wilson writes:
> > > > A thread on "Dragonriders of Pern" MOCs is having a hard time
> > > > finding a home because there just isn't a newsgroup (AFAIK) that it
> > > > fits into. How about a lugnet.fantasy or build.fantasy newsgroup?
> > > > [..]
> > > By analogy with build.ancient (which is for people building stuff not
> > > covered by a current LEGO(r) theme), build.fantasy may be the best fit!
> >
> > I think so... as otehrs poiinted out, LOTR stuff would fit well in there too
> > and there are many otehr fantasy book series which people might be
> > interested in building/talking about if there was somewhere to do it.
>
> This is sounding like a good plan. build.fantasy
>
> Of course, this may invite space folks to request build.sci-fi... there are
> probably plenty of them who would argue that sci-fi = space about as much as
> fantasy = castle.
Some questions though to ask before adding a new group are (and some
good examples):
1. is it truly needed (i.e. are there complaints about where people are
posting something that can't be resolved by directing the traffic to an
existing group [i.e. complaints about people posting castles in .general
are resolved by asking them to post in .castle, can the complaint about
posting Pern discussion in .build.ancient be resolved by asking the Pern
discussion to happen in .castle or .space?]) (.castle.org.cw)
2. what traffic is expected to move there, and how much prodding will be
done (i.e. if we just add a new group, but people are really free to
continue posting where they were posting, but one or two people start
using the new group, does it needlessly fragment discussion).
(.build.mecha, .build.military)
3. does the new group provide a place to bring fragmented discussion
together (.build hierarchy)
4. do people discussing the thing need their own space to avoid being
drowned out (.build.ancient, .castle.ninja)
5. will the new group stimulate new discussion (.admin.suggestions,
.admin.finance [I couldn't think of a good example of a "play" group
which fits this but these two admin groups have clearly stimulated some
very good discussions])
I'm not sure I see a reason yet to split Pern or LOTR discussion out to
someplace different, but perhaps the stimulation of new discussion would
be good. Or perhaps those wanting to talk about Pern don't want to wade
through .space or .castle (a rather valid issue, but one would have to
ask will other traffic move to .build.fantasy and drown out the Pern
discussion).
Frank
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Fantasy group?
|
| (...) I have a different set of questions: 1. Does it reflect a type of posting that can reasonably be expected on LUGNET, that does not have an obvious home? Sorry, I guess that's just one question. There's little harm in creating new groups, (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Fantasy group?
|
| (...) This is sounding like a good plan. build.fantasy Of course, this may invite space folks to request build.sci-fi... there are probably plenty of them who would argue that sci-fi = space about as much as fantasy = castle. (...) I agree. It (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
29 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
|
|
|
|
