| |
In lugnet.general, blisses@worldnet.att.net (Steve Bliss) writes:
> > lugnet.clubs.pnltc
> > lugnet.clubs.gmltc
> > lugnet.clubs.novaltc
> > lugnet.clubs.baylug
> > lugnet.clubs.nelug
>
> I *still* think that's a good idea, at least until there are *dozens* of
> clubs around.
That's exactly how I see it, too, except for one thing: it's that "at least
until" part that makes me really nervous.
What happens when there -are- dozens of clubs around? This could be as soon
as 6 months from now. Do we delete or move groups around? Rearrange the
hierachy? That would certainly work, but I'd hate to choose a path leading
that way, because of the disruption and chaos.
A year ago, when things were just beginning, it was pretty easy to rename a
group. (Remember when we renamed .loc.us.mi.gr to .loc.us.mi.grr? -- that
was super-easy.) But nowadays, it's no cakewalk because of all of the
interlinking of everything. Even deleting nearly empty groups is a bit of a
logistical nightmare. More background:
http://www.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=2252
http://www.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=2329
http://www.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=2330
Moving the Yonkers group wasn't trivial either:
http://www.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=1180&t=i&v=a
Some logistical considerations to think about... Moving (renaming) a
newsgroup:
* Ruins everyone's newsreader settings. (With good old-fashioned
newsreaders that use .newsrc files for everything, you can just
edit the file and change the name, but many "modern" newsreaders
force you to unsubscribe from the old group and resubscribe to the
new group, and you lose all of your read/unread statuses and locks
and things like that.)
* Ruins everyone's email filters if they're subscribed via e-mail.
* Ruins everyone's bookmarks to web pages.
* Makes everyone re-learn a group name they were once familiar with.
* Makes replying to existing messages far more difficult. (Although
the articles on the server itself can be munged to fix up the ng
names in the headers, any articles sitting on a person's local
machine will still have the old names.)
* And probably several dozen other little nasty things. :)
So that's why I shy away from a fully-exapansive .clubs hierarchy... Again,
this is a different view from last fall; we didn't have a web interface back
then, or news-by-mail, or many other issues to worry about back then.
> And the best way (in my mind) for lugnet to encourage more
> clubs, is to concentrate the existing clubs in one hierarchy, to show
> everyone just how many clubs there are.
>
> Or maybe it would be better to have a www.lugnet.com/clubs/ homepage,
> without a newsgroup behind it. The clubs homepage would provide links to
> the club-homepages, where-ever they are in the lugnet hierarchy.
>
> There could be a lugnet.clubs group underlying the homepage, for general
> discussion about clubs. It could serve as a launchpad for new clubs, just
> getting organized.
That sounds like a good, workable possibility -- a single .clubs group with
pointers everywhere. Just like .trains.org is, but for everything (not just
trains).
> > lugnet.loc.nl.org.debouwsteen (or lugnet.loc.nl.org.bouwsteen)
> > lugnet.trains.org.pnltc
> > lugnet.trains.org.gmltc
> > lugnet.trains.org.novaltc
> > lugnet.loc.us.ca.org.baylug
> > lugnet.loc.us.org.nelug
>
> Hmm. Seems kind of overly-long. And a bit inconsistent. Would it make
> more sense for all club-groups to be based in the .loc hierarchy?
What about "virtual" clubs that span the globe -- purely topical or
demographic groups, rather than geographical groups? Where would they
fit in?
> I suppose the train-clubs have more affinity to the .trains hierarchy
> than they do to their geographic location, but still...
Where would you put the train clubs in the loc hierarchy?
For instance, is NOVALTC purely strictly a Virgina-based group?
lugnet.loc.us.va.org.novaltc
or does it extend a bit past Virginia into West Virginia and Maryland?
lugnet.loc.us.org.novaltc
(Similarly for NGLTC -- is it GA-only or also parts of SC, NC, TN, and AL?)
Is PNLTC purely strictly a Pacific Northwest *U.S.* group?
lugnet.loc.us.org.pnltc
or does it extend a bit past Washington and into British Columbia?
lugnet.loc.org.gmltc
Is BayLUG purely strictly a Bay-Area (San Francisco+) group?
lugnet.loc.us.ca.sf.org.baylug
or does it extend quite a ways into California?
lugnet.loc.us.ca.org.baylug
One way to iron out the blurriness would be always to place a group at the
highest reasonable point in the ng hierarchy; another way would be always to
place a group at the "intuitive" level or "home base" level in the hierarchy
-- in other words where the group is mainly based: .loc.us for PNLTC,
GMLTC, and NELUG; .loc.us.ca.sf for BayLUG; .loc.us.va for NOVALTC,
loc.us.ga for NGLTC.
> > The .org paradigm is already in place in two spots...
> >
> > lugnet.trains.org - National and local train clubs/organizations for
> > LEGO® enthusiasts: group formation, founding, planning, announcements,
> > etc.; inter-group coordination and planning; general ideas, thoughts,
> > inspirations, insights, experiences, etc.
> >
> > lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw - Focused discussion group for the planning and
> > development of the domain ldraw.org, its website, and related
> > resources.
>
> I don't think ldraw.org counts as a club, since we're unlikely to ever have
> an RL meeting.
No, right. I just was giving it as an example of the .org paradigm. ("org"
kind of sits nicely among the words "club" and "users group" and other
people-aggregation terms.)
--Todd
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: De Bouwsteen club
|
| On Thu, 12 Aug 1999 21:39:04 GMT, lehman@javanet.com (Todd Lehman) wrote: [Snipped good reasons for doing ng's right the first time] You make a great argument. I *hate* it when my newsreader settings get messed up. (And don't get me started on (...) (25 years ago, 13-Aug-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.nl, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: De Bouwsteen club
|
| (...) Actually, NOVALTC covers Northern VA, DC and adjacent Maryland, so it would fit better in lugnet.loc.us.org.novaltc . We should really think about our name. I'll put this on the list of things to discuss at our first meeting this coming (...) (25 years ago, 13-Aug-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.nl, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: De Bouwsteen club
|
| (...) What about a heirarchy that echos (to a certain extent) the primary hierarchy? i.e.: lugnet.clubs.trains.gmltc lugnet.clubs.trains.novaltc lugnet.clubs.general.baylug lugnet.clubs.general.nelug lugnet.clubs.cad.ldraw A hierarchy like this is (...) (25 years ago, 15-Aug-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.nl, lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: De Bouwsteen club
|
| (...) I *still* think that's a good idea, at least until there are *dozens* of clubs around. And the best way (in my mind) for lugnet to encourage more clubs, is to concentrate the existing clubs in one hierarchy, to show everyone just how many (...) (25 years ago, 12-Aug-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.nl)
|
32 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
|
|
|
|
