Subject:
|
Re: Purpose of .lego.direct??
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 21 Aug 2000 00:34:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
280 times
|
| |
|
|
What I would like to know is what is considered appropriate, and what is
*not* considered appropriate.
For example, I thought it prudent to have given TLG a heads-up about some
pieces that aren't readily available that I wanted, and posted it in there.
Now, if the post was sent to that newsgroup in error and not the appropriate
newsgroup that they wished to find it in, I would appreciate someone telling
me of such inappropriateness.
I read the charter for that group, and it would appear that piece-requests
were appropriate - if this was not meant to be the case, I would appreciate
someone making corrections to the charter for that group.
Cheers ...
Geoffrey Hyde
Kyle D. Jackson <flightdeck@sympatico.deletethisspamblock.ca> wrote in
message news:FzLFM0.1y9@lugnet.com...
>
> G'day folks,
>
> I recently stumbled upon the ruckus in .dear-lego about this-and-that of • late
> pertaining to LEGO Direct's interaction with LUGNET. As I had not been
> following much of the posts leading up to that, someone referred me to
> the .lego.direct group for more info. Specifically, this was in regard to
> some kind of "leak" of new set info.
>
> Prior to entering the group, I read the general post from Todd that • explains
> the intended difference between .dear-lego and .lego.direct. As I • understand
> it, .lego.direct is supposed to be a path for directing messages • specifically
> to personnel at LEGO Direct, such as Mr. Brad Justus, and not to be used • for a
> general discussion area. But what I found upon entering the group was • that I
> had to go back through about 140 messages to find the "start" of the • thread
> (excluding the deleted messages). The content of only a very, very few of
> those messages could be taken as questions directed to LEGO Direct. The • rest
> were just general discussion of recent events and untargeted "open • letters".
> As I understand it these sorts of posts should have gone to .dear-lego or • some
> other suitable forum.
>
> Eventually I did find a message from Suzanne asking everyone to cut the • signal-
> to-noise ratio in the group, after which the chatter seemed to cease.
>
> As I have not followed these groups to-date (but certainly will now), am I
> understanding their respective intended purposes correctly? Would it • perhaps
> be helpful to somehow reinforce to LUGNET users those "mission statements" • for
> both the .dear-lego and the .lego.direct groups? Some folks at LD must be
> pretty confused with all the traffic...
>
> Thanx,
> KDJ
> ________________________________________________________________
> Kyle D. Jackson, P.Eng., Windsor, Ontario, Canada, LUGNETer #203
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Purpose of .lego.direct??
|
| G'day folks, I recently stumbled upon the ruckus in .dear-lego about this-and-that of late pertaining to LEGO Direct's interaction with LUGNET. As I had not been following much of the posts leading up to that, someone referred me to the (...) (24 years ago, 20-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
2 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
