 | | Re: Please, just end the entire thing! ( was: Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | (...) Arrr, as us piratical types be saying, the cat's out o' the bag. :-) Bruce (24 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Please, just end the entire thing! ( was: Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —David Phillips
|
| | | | I have told many people about lugnet, and what a great site for lego content, but the volumes of messages the last few days contradict that. When will we be returned to our regularly scheduled programming? (...) if (...) (24 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | (...) As far as I'm aware, all of the religious debate messages are all properly placed in the .off-topic.debate group (with a couple spinoff sub-threads in the .admin.general group)... Just set your newsreader not to download the .off-topic.debate (...) (24 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) I shouldn't be so callous. Quite a few people are visibly upset by (or at least uncomfortably jarred by) the increase in bickering and other non-LEGO discussions recently. Things tend to flare up for a few days and then quiet down, or to go in (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | (...) won't this break the rule of no-special-cases though? Unless there's already a mechanism build in for it...? Dan (also testing netscape news interface - I'm supposed to be able to reply now, right? :) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) Yes, it would break that rule. :-( However... Even though consistency in structure is good from both a mathgeek-sysarch's and an end-user's point of view, I think it's ultimately more important to serve the empirical needs of the end-users (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics) —Peter Callaway
|
| | | | | | (...) summary (...) are (...) away (...) Well, ultimately it's your site, Todd, and I think the T&C's you've set down are entirely fair and reasonable. If you want to change something, far be it for us to complain. After all, moving .off-topic from (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) "Recognisably controversial" -- that's an interesting (and helpful) choice of words. By that metric, I think there are actually 3 areas which could end up deterring newcomers: 1) .off-topic.* 2) .admin.* 3) .market.auction (Not 100% sure about (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics) —Selçuk Göre
|
| | | | | | (...) <click> me too! :-) Excluding those groups from the front page (I mean first page of www.lugnet.com) would be a nice thing (providing that they would still be accessible from the links at the light blue field, as it is now) and I can't (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | (...) :-) (...) Yup, they'll still be available by direct down-clicking into the groups from the light blue band at the top. And they'll still be accessible from the "traffic report" page. (...) OK, thanks for the input. Definitely leaning toward (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics) —Tony Priestman
|
| | | | | | | | On Thu, 9 Mar 2000, Todd Lehman (<Fr5AEn.MyF@lugnet.com>) wrote at 08:03:59 (...) This requires a slight change in viewpoint, but: If you think of the home page as a shop window, you want the good stuff there to encourage people to come in. With (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Yes, definitely! That's one of the later goals of scoring, for the 'lite' homepage which will better serve casual and new users... --Todd (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics) —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | (...) hmmm... but then, it'll be harder for the theoretical user who wants to track these groups from the web interface to know if there's something new/recent in them. Perhaps (until a fully customizable front page is designed) _all_ the groups (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) How close does this get to what you mean?-- (URL) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | | (...) automatically fill this in with the hours since last view or somesuch? Is there an easy way to get a summary page with all the groups once they go away from the home page? That might be useful to some. (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics) —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | | | | On Thu, 9 Mar 2000 14:58:00 GMT Frank Filz <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote concerning 'Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics)': (...) wow! that's an absolutly brilliant (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Hmm, that could be neat. Alternatively, something that exists now -- and I used this method for many many months -- is to view articles in "Brief" form counting upwards rather than downwards. For example, load this up: (URL) then hit reload (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | | | On Thu, 9 Mar 2000 18:04:38 GMT Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote concerning 'Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? (was: Re: Reminder: the .off-topic.* groups ARE for off-topic topics)': (...) filtering... :/ btw, there seems to be (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Hide .off-topic & .admin posts from top page? —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | (...) in the long term, I guess I was thinking more of making the web interface more like a platform-free newsreader. It would remember what that user read, and would mark groups where he has unread messages... Very similar to the news reader, (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Please, just end the entire thing! ( was: Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —James Brown
|
| | | | | (...) We never left it. Fridays are (IIRC) typically slow days for traffic on Lugnet, for a bunch of reasons. Today, that low volume is combined with a fast-paced debate (not the first, won't be the last), so it looks a bit weird on the stats, but (...) (24 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Please, just end the entire thing! ( was: Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | | (...) Is it me, or is there an inordinately large number of people complaining about on-topic discussion in the .off-topic.* groups today? There certainly might be *some* confusion when a newcomer sees four non-Lego messages on the front page. But (...) (24 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The cat is out of the bag (or, this is OFF-TOPIC.DEBATE!!!) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | (...) Why are you asking me? Why not ask the guy who started this discussion? What part of "Off-topic.debate" isn't clear? This has actually been a very good discussion - much better than most. This has been the most benign discussion I have ever (...) (24 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
