To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.generalOpen lugnet.admin.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / General / 6976
    Re: Clue —Todd Lehman
   (...) I think that would be super-confusing, especially from browsing a list of groups. :) What's wrong with .build.minifigs or .fun.gaming or .fun.activities for the sort of thing linked to above? Or even .general ? --Todd (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
   
        Re: Clue —Frank Filz
     (...) Another possibility would be to populate lugnet.fun with a newsgroup. The links above certainly could be posted to all of the groups Todd mentions, but I can see some advantage to having a lugnet.fun for stuff people aren't sure how to (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
    
         Re: Clue —Franklin W. Cain
      Uhmmm... How about "lugnet.silly"? ;-) Franklin (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
     
          Re: Clue —Matthew Miller
      (...) Yeah, that might be good. Although it'd have to be clear that it's not for off-topic silliness. (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
    
         Re: Clue —Todd Lehman
     (...) Perfect. --Todd (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
   
        Re: Clue —Matthew Miller
     (...) Nothing, except that people -- even completely reasonable people *grin* -- seem drawn to post lego-related fun in .off-topic.fun. (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
    
         Re: Clue —Shiri Dori
     (...) I'll take that as a compliment? <grin> Yeah, o-t.fun seems like a "natural" place for silliness and fun... it's just not really obvious that off-topic.fun is for <emphasis> OFF-TOPIC <\emphasis> fun. Because there isn't a place for on-topic, (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
   
        Re: Clue —Shiri Dori
   (...) Nothing's *wrong* with either of the groups. But I would think it excessive xposting, because I could be posting to tons of "suitable" groups. It seemed to me most appropriate in .org.cw, where Scar is well known; and off- topic.fun, because (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
   
        Re: Clue —Paul Baulch
    Shiri Dori wrote in message ... (...) seemed (...) It sounds like everyone has forgotten what .general is for... oh well, it does mean that I spend less time in front of the computer. *sigh* Paul LUGNET member 164 (URL) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
   
        Re: Clue —Frank Filz
   (...) Actually, in some ways, I don't think lugnet.general is very necessary any more. We have lugnet.build for discussing techniques. We have the theme groups for discussing things which are of primary interest to folks in a particular theme. We (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
   
        Re: Clue —Shiri Dori
     (...) Definitely. These groups summarize pretty much everything that is discussed in lugnet.general, and IMHO are neccessary, or for the very least good ideas to decrease the volume of posts in .general. I agree with Frank, .general should be for (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
   
        .general (was Re: Clue) —Matthew Miller
     (...) That's an interesting suggestion. Of course, traffic would certainly die out pretty quickly in any given group, but it would eventually become a nice historical record of what people thought about the sets in a given year. (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
   
        Re: Clue —Steve Bliss
   (...) Disagree. There will always be odd-ball discussions with nowhere to go but .general. (...) I agree with all of these. Especially if the homepage for .parts had a crosslink to .db.inv. Steve (24 years ago, 22-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
   
        Re: Clue —Frank Filz
    Steve Bliss wrote in message <7h54ls05eh2m9ub4j24...ax.com>... (...) Well, I did say that I didn't think it was VERY necessary anymore. I guess in some ways, what I'm saying is that half the discussion in general would be better off in another (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
 

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR