Subject:
|
Re: Maybe "Dear Lego" sub groups would help
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 29 Dec 1999 23:30:53 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
[mattdm@mattdm.org]IHateSpam[]
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
792 times
|
| |
|
|
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote:
> Bulk purchases
> lugnet.dear-lego.bulk
> lugnet.dear-lego.bulksales
> lugnet.dear-lego.bulk-ordering
I think "bulk" is probably sufficient to convey the meaning, but "bulksales"
is more clear.
> Legal issues
> lugnet.dear-lego.copyright
> lugnet.dear-lego.fairplay
> lugnet.dear-lego.legal
Definitely .legal. Copyright is far too narrow. "Fair play" may not
always be the name of the Lego Company's statement. And that may be too
narrow too, as there may be legal issues which come up that are not covered
by that statement.
> Internet issues
> lugnet.dear-lego.internet
> lugnet.dear-lego.web
> lugnet.dear-lego.website
> lugnet.dear-lego.www
These seem to tend in different directions. ".internet" sounds like it's
about the Lego Company's presence on the 'net; a sort of "meta-dear-lego".
This is probably closest to what's intended, yeah? It would encompass
anything tLC does (or fails to do) online -- web, Usenet, LUGnet.
".web" and ".www" sound like they'd easily get crossover from .legal -- "Can
I do this on my web page?" ".website" for some reason (maybe this is just
me) seems to be more about <URL:http://www.lego.com>. I think this is too
narrow, since it should be at least plural.
I understand the wish to have somewhere for constructive criticism of tLC's
web efforts in specific, so maybe one of the .w* choices is good. But I
think I prefer the broader .internet.
> Elements, sets, themes:
> lugnet.dear-lego.element(s)
> lugnet.dear-lego.theme(s)
> lugnet.dear-lego.set(s)
> lugnet.dear-lego.product(s)
I'd go with the first three.
".product(s) seems way too vague -- could be about anything. On the other
hand, seems like there might be room for a .non-brick-products -- computer
games, clothing, whatever. (Of course, that name is too long....)
> Likes, dislikes, etc.
> lugnet.dear-lego.complaint(s)
> lugnet.dear-lego.dislike(s)
> lugnet.dear-lego.like(s)
> lugnet.dear-lego.no-thanks
> lugnet.dear-lego.problem(s)
> lugnet.dear-lego.rant
> lugnet.dear-lego.rave
> lugnet.dear-lego.thanks
I like: .likes, .dislikes, and .rant.
".thanks"/".no-thanks" seems more polite than productive. Not that there's
anything wrong with polite, but .likes/.dislikes seems more dialog-oriented.
Positive raves are probably welcome in .likes, but it's nice to have the
.rant for when people want to spew but want to make a clear distinction from
a .dislikes post.
> Wishes, suggestions, etc.
> lugnet.dear-lego.suggestion(s)
> lugnet.dear-lego.suggestion-box
> lugnet.dear-lego.wish(es)
.suggestions. I'd encourage this over .suggestion-box because again it seems
more dialog oriented. Suggestion boxes get little slips of paper fed to
them which are never seen again....
.wishes might be a seperate group, but probably if .suggestions is there and
also the more specific .sets,.themes, etc., it don't think it's necessary.
> Miscellaneous:
> lugnet.dear-lego.announce
Not sure who's doing the announcing. "dear-lego" implies a lot that _we_ are
talking to Lego. So .announce would be where I announce that I've written
them a letter? I'd suggest that the Lego people continue to post their
announcements to the general .announce group.
> lugnet.dear-lego.clubs
sure.
> lugnet.dear-lego.direct
how does this differ from .bulk/.bulksales?
> lugnet.dear-lego.event(s)
sure.
> lugnet.dear-lego.legoland
Or .legolands?
> lugnet.dear-lego.lsahs
> lugnet.dear-lego.sales
> lugnet.dear-lego.service
Hmm. What about another level for sales:
lugnet.dear-lego.sales.bulk
lugnet.dear-lego.sales.specials or .lsahs
lugnet.dear-lego.sales.retail (or somesuch)
lugnet.dear-lego.sales.marketing
lugnet.dear-lego.sales.promotions
> 2) Subgroups of a new hierarchy lugnet.lego:
Huh, should have read this first. :) Yeah. I like that. Takes away my issue
with the .annouce group, for one thing.
> And additionally, either breaking lugnet.dear-lego into
> lugnet.dear-lego.rant
> lugnet.dear-lego.rave
Potential confusion here over which groups go under which section.
".suggestions", for example, seems like a very "dear-lego" group. I don't
necessarily have a solution for that, but seems like an issue.
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
12 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
