Subject:
|
Re: Clue
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 21 Jun 2000 14:35:29 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
231 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Frank Filz writes:
> From the above, I could see the following groups being worthwhile
>
> lugnet.history
> lugnet.parts
> lugnet.new-sets.xxxx (where xxxx is the year)
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 things who don't fit anywhere else.
Also, opening .fun for posts would give a good place for "on-topic fun".
-Shiri
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Clue
|
| (...) 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)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
