 | | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
| (...) I agree, I'm not sure. I assumed it would belong in .nntp, just because we're talking about threading, and how it should work... But looking at the nntp charter, it's not clear if it belongs there or not. (...) Heh, whatever I think of bashing (...) (22 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
| (...) The fact that past threads became debates doesn't mean that talking about NASA is OT for .geek. I'd recommend judging each thread by it's own contents, not by the history of the subject. (...) Regardless if anyone actually replies to the (...) (22 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
| There is some confusion in my mind about whether this topic belongs in .general or .nntp... read the charter for general and it's on topic there. Plus that's where every other admin post is. So FUT to both I guess. (...) Whether it was already a (...) (22 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
| This is a reply to both Kelly and Steve (close by in the tree) and the FUT is set to just admin.general (...) I don't know what's proper. We're experimenting. I hope people won't get too upset about it, till we get it right. I did an experiment (...) (22 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
| (...) Had further thoughts about this - are there guidelines about recognizing at what point a thread should be rerouted into a different group? This particular thread, IMO, is pretty harmless (now), but I can see how (URL) threads can deteriorate>. (...) (22 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
|
