Subject:
|
Re: Fed UP!!!!!!!!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 20 Jul 2004 03:49:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
242 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Alfred Speredelozzi wrote:
> I agree, I just think that the LUGNET admins were jumping all over the
> respondants and not so much to Randall.
I think I speak for all of us when I say... If we had seen this when only
Randall had posted, that's where we would have started trying to guide to the
right place. It was too late for that when I first saw it though. But I agree,
his post was off topic and should, in a perfect world, have been where the
guidance to the right area started.
> "Taking names" and "check your attitude
> at the door" and such comments seemed to be fairly aimed at us who wanted to
> defend the position of continual complaint.
I think that's an inaccurate characterization, and a bit unfair, perhaps.
We all have different styles, and different thresholds for when we start to be
more direct in our approach. The first few steering posts I think were pretty
mild. The frustrating part for us is that when posts continue to veer, it's easy
to start thinking that people aren't listening to the redirection, perhaps out
of spite, or because they're annoyed, or because they want to annoy the admins,
instead of what is more likely the truth... that they're reading in time order
and just haven't seen the redirect requests yet because they're responding to
things before the first one was made, or even more innocuously, they just hit
reply and forgot to reset the fut because of how the post they were replying to
was set.
> I just hope they could be a bit
> more humble in their approach next time.
Sorry, don't follow you there. It's not a matter of humility I don't think.
Merely aggravation threshold. This topic is aggravating for everyone to start
with, I think.
> > I'll take the full blame, by the way, for creating a discussion system in
> > which it is very difficult to migrate discussions cleanly from one area to
> > another. This seems to be perhaps the ultimate underlying cause of a lot of
> > the back-and-forth that's been going on since April-May.
> >
> > --Todd
>
> Oh well, considering the options for on-line discussion groups, I don't think
> you deserve any blame.
It's not really about blame, it's about design decisions. Hindsight is 20-20, it
would be hard to forsee this small issue in the implementation before one made
key implementation choices. And it's a relatively small issue, I think. There
are lots of other implementations that solve this particular one, but have far
worse flaws in other areas.
> If this leads to some new feature in the future, then
> great. Untill then, I'll try my best to keep my posts in the right compartment.
Stay tuned. This has been a very active topic behind the scenes and Todd already
has something in test that might ameliorate this.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Fed UP!!!!!!!!
|
| (...) I've been thinking that it might be very useful if LUGNET had a mode (in the web interface) where only the first message in each thread were displayed. This would make it much easier for people to ignore the topics that they don't wish to read (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Fed UP!!!!!!!!
|
| (...) I agree, I just think that the LUGNET admins were jumping all over the respondants and not so much to Randall. "Taking names" and "check your attitude at the door" and such comments seemed to be fairly aimed at us who wanted to defend the (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
6 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
|
|
|
|
