 | | Re: admin.dev? [Was: Dear NNTP users]
|
|
(...) I agree! But I would also add, I think this project needs at least some kind of coherent plan as to what exactly is needed before it can make any useful headway. Coders are fine for trying out stuff, and coding the final requirements, but (...) (19 years ago, 1-Aug-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: admin.dev? [Was: Dear NNTP users]
|
|
--SNIP-- (...) IMHO the best option would be to have the team led (in the very loosest of terms) by someone with a user design background (or failing that level of expertise, and sort of design). The number of technically savvy but ugly and (...) (19 years ago, 1-Aug-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: admin.dev? [Was: Dear NNTP users]
|
|
(...) Oooo! Me! Me! [shouting and waving] ;-) -Suz (19 years ago, 1-Aug-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: admin.dev? [Was: Dear NNTP users]
|
|
(...) Anyone.... Anyone... (else) Bueller??? Bueller??? (smile) (19 years ago, 2-Aug-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: admin.dev? [Was: Dear NNTP users]
|
|
(...) lol. yeah, well, I -do- miss that job, ya know? I haven't gotten to see any real improvements since years ago. back when LUGNET was fun. Hmm ..trying to remember what the last thing was. I guess it was the adding of the 'active threads in..' (...) (19 years ago, 2-Aug-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: admin.dev?
|
|
(...) I will not claim that what you write is not true (because it probably is), but if we're talking voluntary work, you shouldn't expect coders to code things they can't see the point with. It is fine with somebody trying to give orders, but don't (...) (19 years ago, 2-Aug-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: admin.dev?
|
|
(...) yeah. To be honest, this sort of stuff should be left to think about after the change in ownership. I mean, it's great to think and talk anytime - I just mean that, because there's no urgency, we needen't stress about it right now. -Suz (19 years ago, 3-Aug-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
