Subject:
|
Re: Is the norm for multiple .market posts changing?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:53:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
753 times
|
| |
|
|
> > > > > Hello all!
> > > >
> > > > Hello, hello, hello, hello, hello, hello! (is there an echo in here?
> > > > Yes, there is!!!!!)
>
> > You might consider just posting 1 "hello" in your post rather than
> > six. (My brain is hurting with the echo of "hello.")
>
> Sorry about that. It made the point though, eh?, and I think it did it much
> more economically than posting the same suggestion to combine multiple very
> similar offers into one post as a follow up to all 6 original messages, right?
Give me a break. I don't get it Larry. Why is this such a big deal for
you? I really want to know. Do you not understand my intention of posting
six different trade ads? It's all very simple. I do not think it's wrong
to let everyone know EXACTLY what I am offering for trade. Thus, I made
room for the number and name of the set. I'll say it again, not everyone
has every Lego number memorized like you. Maybe it is one thing when you
are posting for common sets that show up quite often. If I'm selling 20
Legos all part of the Town theme and are in the 66xx series, then I will say
early Town sets for sale. I personally feel that the sets I am offering for
trade are not the most common of sets and thought it would be best to post
in six separate messages. I for one would be more opt to reading a post
that says "Lego xxxx <name of set> For Trade" than "Lego for trade." Seems
like common sense to me.
>
> > Save on reading? The subject was clear. Why open up each one? Mark
> > as read for each one and carry on. It's not like there are hundreds of
> > posts.
>
> So in your view 6 are OK but hundreds would not be?
6 straightforward messages were posted. All of them listed the exact set
that was being offered for trade. Some people may have 5 of those sets, and
may want the other...so they just read that one. And the same if you only
have 1 of those sets...read the other 5. Again, I posted separate messages
because the sets are rather rare. Sorry Larry, 6 posts is not a lot no
matter what you think.
> What number do you feel would be the reasonable dividing line? 10? 99? (not
> one hundred) 199 (technically not "hundreds")? Some other number? This is a
> serious question and I hope you (and others) answer it seriously.
Who is going to post 199 messages? Nobody because it is ridiculous.
Everybody knows what is reasonable and what is not. Rare sets NEED to be
spelled out exactly the way they are...because they are just that...RARE!
Common sets do not. PERIOD.
>
> > > > (most of what you want are on many an AFOL's wanted list)
>
> > > Sorry, I think Brendan did it right. There's nothing wrong with
> > > posting each item separately. It's easy enough to tell by the subject
> > > whether he's offering something you want or not.
>
> In my view, It's not the convention here to post the way Brendan did. At
> least it wasn't the last time this came up. Perhaps as LUGNET's user
> community changes, the norms are changing as well. I'd be interested to see
> if that's actually the case or not. Hence XFUT to admin.general...
>
> > I agree.
> >
> > > And just putting the set numbers in the subject is not good enough -
> > > many people do not know sets by their numbers. I for one would not
> > > even have read his messages if it didn't have the set *names*.
>
> This is a side issue, but it's a good point. Perhaps just the set numbers
> alone would indeed not be a good subject line.
>
> How about this as a suggested line for a comprehensive post that included
> multiple sets for trade and multiple that would be considered in exchange?
>
> "FT: Multiple very rare early town sets including 1234 2345 3445 2134 1333 1233"
In my opinion, you need the name of the Lego for rare sets in the subject
line. Make it straightforward immediately.
>
> (pick the N best ones for the subject, till you run out of room)
>
> I would argue that actually is a better subject line, since many of these
> sets are indeed very rare. To those that don't know set numbers, they may
> also not realise how rare and desireable some of these are.
>
> So... Why bring this up at all?
>
> People are saying, why worry, just skip the 6 posts (if you are news or
> web) or discard the 6 emails... but they do place a load, however limited,
> that's in my view not needed to be placed, on LUGNET. And on the readers.
Yeah, and so do these posts! You think people actually want to read this
discussion we're having now Larry? When people sign up to get e-mails from
this newsgroup, they are looking at posts regarding trade items, for sale
items, etc. etc.
>
> Whenever I see "server not available due to heavy load" I worry. And if the
> dividing line is (at least according to Ken, and maybe others) way way
> higher than 6, that scares me just thinking about it.
>
> Also... Some people use the newsgroups differently than you do, remember...
> If you are using the web interface and viewing the posts in sequence using
> the links to the next post in the upper right, you're asking the server to
> serve you the post without knowing that you would have skipped it. Maybe
> that's a bad way to do it. but it nevertheless is a way that i suspect some
> people other than me use.
>
> Why bring this up publicly instead of via email to just Brendan?
>
> That point has been discussed before and I'm firmly in the camp that
> believes that private emails benefit only the recepient. If multiple posts
> of essentially the same info are not a good idea, it benefits all readers to
> be reminded of it, not just the person who wasn't aware of the norm.
>
> Now, if the norm IS changing, discussion of that and the ramifications will
> in the long term benefit LUGNET more than having it silently change without
> it being clear to the community.
I felt like I knew what I was doing and I felt that I was doing it
correctly. It was clear, concise, right to the point. I think if someone
was not interested in any of the Legos, they just skip right over them. I
honestly think it's that simple.
But I think I get it now. You're the model poster Larry. I would
appreciate it if you could send me a template on how to post multiple
messages. I want to make sure that I do it right in the future and not get
under your skin for it. The last thing I want to have happen is to get
ostracized from Lugnet because I posted 6 individual messages and Larry
disapproved!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
2 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
