Subject:
|
Re: 1 new or 3?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 5 Jun 2000 12:49:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
231 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Geoffrey Hyde writes:
> Umm ... Mate, what was the original question for then? ;-)
http://www.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=6808
> My thinking is that it is probably better for the lugnet server not to
> bother with low traffic newsgroups at all. It would mean that the server
> doesn't have to worry about tracking them.
I don't know how it is implemented, but it really shouldn't be much of an
overhead :) Besides, not showing low-traffic groups on the traffic page is
a great way to ensure that they stay low-traffic!
Richard
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: 1 new or 3?
|
| Umm ... Mate, what was the original question for then? ;-) My thinking is that it is probably better for the lugnet server not to bother with low traffic newsgroups at all. It would mean that the server doesn't have to worry about tracking them. -- (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
10 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
|
|
|
|
