| |
In lugnet.castle.org, Frank Filz writes:
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> >
> > In lugnet.admin.general, Frank Filz writes:
> > > I'm wondering if lugnet.castle.org should be made into a non-postable
> > > group. It seems to sport occasional Castle World postings which really
> > > don't belong since lugnet.castle.org.cw exists, and not much else.
> > >
> > > Frank "compartmentalized dork" Filz
> >
> > Once it went non postable, where would discussion of a competing (to CW)
> > group and its early formative stage posts themselves go (prior to it getting
> > its own castle.org.subgroup), should such arise?
> >
> > Mostly rhetorical, CW presumably has first mover. One COULD, however,
> > contemplate a group with a radically different charter though
> > (hyperrealistic modeling of real world castles and trappings rather than the
> > fantasy storylineish bent of CW)...
>
> I agree that there's certainly room for more .castle.orgs. My suggestion
> is that the point at which someone wants to start such a suggestion,
> they just ask for lugnet.castle.org to open for posting again.
Check. Much hassle to flip on and off, ne? Would just getting more serious
about gently guiding misposts EACH time you see them help?
>
> The other option perhaps is to just get real serious about asking people
> to post properly. Things seem to be getting pretty slipshod.
I thought they were tending towards better (although just a slight tend) at
least in the last few weeks. No?
> Of course I
> have a high degree of intolerance for out of place posts, I just usually
> am not vocal...
>
> Some pet peeves of mine:
>
> lugnet.general
>
> posting to one group with follow-ups to another (if the post belongs in
> either place at all, it certainly can be in both places initially - this
> especially applies to the lugnet.announce hierarchy. If you just post
> your castle creation to lugnet.announce.moc, I may or may not see it,
> and when I get back to updating my links pages, your creation might not
> get linked if I didn't happen to leave one of the replies "unread").
Ya, this one bugs me too. One needs to XFUT not just FUT or the context
chain is fragmented for the FUTed group readers.
<snip>
> lugnet.trains.org has some discussion which really belongs in
> lugnet.trains. Keep lugnet.trains.org for discussion of new groups, and
> announcement of shows, and announcement of picture galleries from shows
> and the like (though the picture galleries should be cross-posted to
> lugnet.trains with follow-ups set there). Of course that's my own
> selfish desires...
Send me a few links off line that illustrate this one will you? I'm AOK with
being a bit stronger on that particular point in that particular hierarchy...
> Frank
> (whose in a whiny mood today...)
Whose (what) is in a whiny mood?? :-)
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Use of lugnet.castle.org
|
| (...) That tends to provoke cries of "who are you, the LUGNET police?" and "why can't I, I'm just as right as you" (or "I wanted to post my sale announcement here because I didn't get any traffic from b-s-t"). Then we get the obligatory "Is LUGNET (...) (23 years ago, 10-Feb-02, to lugnet.castle.org, lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Use of lugnet.castle.org
|
| (...) I agree that there's certainly room for more .castle.orgs. My suggestion is that the point at which someone wants to start such a suggestion, they just ask for lugnet.castle.org to open for posting again. The other option perhaps is to just (...) (23 years ago, 10-Feb-02, to lugnet.castle.org, lugnet.admin.general)
|
7 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
|
|
|
|
