| |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, edboxer@aol.com (Ed Jones) writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Todd Lehman writes:
> > > I suppose I'd be pretty content with anything ranking at a 3 or higher.
> > > What d'y'all think?
> >
> > I don't think we need a pun group.
>
> I don't think we need it, either. Not by a longshot. But it could still be
> lot of fun. We can even print it out on rolls of toilet paper and send it
> to Mike every couple of weeks.
Hmmm, does a toilet paper printer jam require the use of a plunger? :')
> The idea (as I see it) behind a .off-topic.pun group isn't so much to funnel
> away or divert puns from other groups, but to give a place for spurious and
> devilishly silly you-have-been-punned posts.
the only danger I can see is unwanted puns turning into flame wars.
>
> > off-topic.quotes - in fact I saw an incredible T-shirt today - "Hang out
> > with Jesus, he hung out for you" (several ways to look at this - bad
> > taste, hysterical, really week religious advertising, etc.)
>
> Do you really mean .off-topic.quotes or did you mean .off-topic.qotd?
> Because they have different connotations: Something called .quotes invites
> all sorts of quotes -- from famous writers, poets, politicians, actors, Bill
> Gateses, etc. -- while .qotd is specially for highlighting things that have
> appeared only within this ng system. Both are useful/fun, but there are
> already Usenet groups for regular quotes that are probably much better
> suited to the task, plus I don't want to invite (via the friendly name)
> quote lists obtained from outside sources (so, copyright issues, etc.).
I assumed incorrectly and thought it would invite all sorts of quotes. I cna
live with it either way.
>
> > I'd also like to see "off-topic.sports" (but I guess as it wasn't even a
> > consideration in the original lists, it a mute point).
>
> Oh heck, no, that doesn't have to be moot. It just has never come up
> before. Are there people here who are into sports? Would it degenerate
> into Basketball vs. Baseball vs. Football debates or "you say football, I
> say soccer" debates?
I think one group would cover it - most sports are seasonal. Of course there
would be the inevitable overlapping of basketball/baseball, baseball/football,
etc. But one group could certainly handle it.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: .off-topic groups
|
| (...) I don't think we need it, either. Not by a longshot. But it could still be lot of fun. We can even print it out on rolls of toilet paper and send it to Mike every couple of weeks. (...) Nahhh, just 'cause there's a .pun group, doesn't mean (...) (25 years ago, 28-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
33 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
