Subject:
|
Re: Clue
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 23 Jun 2000 03:52:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
471 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote in message <7h54ls05eh2m9ub4j24kbn00n1c9svndq4@4ax.com>...
> In lugnet.admin.general, Frank Filz wrote:
>
> > Actually, in some ways, I don't think lugnet.general is very necessary
> > any more.
>
> Disagree. There will always be odd-ball discussions with nowhere to go but
> .general.
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 group (or set of groups).
I agree, a place for oddball conversations is worthwhile, but it's getting trafficy enough that I find it tiresome to wade through,
especially when half the discussions are in fact crossposted to a theme area (and then I get annoyed when I start to read the thread
in general, realize it's crossposted to the appropriate thread, but by reading in general, Netscape has marked it read over in
trains or whatever, and marking it unread ONLY makes it unread in general (on the other hand, I dislike that Outlook Express marks
it undread across the board, give me a choice darn it...)).
> > lugnet.history
> > lugnet.parts
> > lugnet.new-sets.xxxx (where xxxx is the year)
>
> I agree with all of these. Especially if the homepage for .parts had a
> crosslink to .db.inv.
Good idea on the cross link. .parts may also not be the best name, but my thought is a group to ask the "where is this part
available in" type questions, among other things.
Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Clue
|
| (...) 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)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
