Subject:
|
Re: Introducing LEGO Direct
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 13 Dec 1999 04:59:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
155 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Jasper Janssen writes:
> On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:12:53 GMT, Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote:
> > I agree, dear-lego is a good name for the group.
> [...]
> I agree that dear-lego is quite a good name, but IMHO retroactively
> altering things, especially as important as group charters, is Evil.
I get the sense that some sort of undirected rant group is still desired by
at least a few. I think there's a good chance that traffic in this area will
boom majorly for certain discussions and it's tough for me to imagine not
having at least 3 subgroups to keep the traffic focused and manageable for
those involved. Perhaps the name lugnet.dear-lego.direct would be a good
first sub-group name.
> Moving the current dear-lego archive to elsewhere and recreating a new
> group with the old name (logically, if maybe not technically at least)
> would be the obvious solution, since on Lugnet, you can do that - on
> Usenet at large, it wouldn't work.
Well, actually, can't do that here either... If the web interface were the
only gateway to the news core, it would be possible, but NNTP newsreaders
hold old messages, and some people are running caching NNRP servers. When
we cleared out the original beta-test groups in September of 1998, it caused
quite a bit of problems for a few people whose newsreaders couldn't properly
unsubscribe and resubscribe (I think it was MSOE of all coincidences ;-).
Anyway, it's not really feasable logistically to clear the messages out of a
group unless the group is going away permanently, like we did when we fixed
the Yonkers NY problem.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Introducing LEGO Direct
|
| In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes: <snippage> (...) I like. The only problem that I can see is that people might confuse the dots and dashes, especially as we become more familiar with LEGO Direct as a term. It wants to read (english-wise) (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Introducing LEGO Direct
|
| (...) I was going to write about this, but I see you've voiced my concerns near-perfectly. I agree that dear-lego is quite a good name, but IMHO retroactively altering things, especially as important as group charters, is Evil. Moving the current (...) (25 years ago, 12-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
5 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
|
|
|
|
