 | | Re: New group suggestion —Frank Filz
|
| | | It seems to me that a new group for hot availability items (good price, unusual offering, etc) is not really necessary. It seems to me that that is the purpose of shopping. Of course a cross post to buy-sell-trade that a particular person is willing (...) (25 years ago, 22-Feb-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: New group suggestion —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | (...) Well, yah, hmm, that's a good point. Who's gonna flog a crummy deal in .shopping? OTOH, .shopping was also set up for discussing any old retail experience -- i.e, anything from FOTW's to GOOB's to ragging on FAOS's alleged high pricing or (...) (25 years ago, 22-Feb-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Groups for years (was: Re: New group suggestion) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | (...) Well, groups do stick around, so the 'new' designator wouldn't be fitting after a certain point. I was thinking if ever there were groups for product line years, they oughtta parallel the DB, since this'll be set up for browsing by year anyway (...) (25 years ago, 22-Feb-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Groups for years (was: Re: New group suggestion) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) make (...) buy (...) want (...) product (...) Sounds like a winner to me. We can slowly backfill the older groups with interesting tidbits. This would be a great place to share things like minor set variations (...) (25 years ago, 22-Feb-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
