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 / 7688
7687  |  7689
Subject: 
Re: the best laid plans of mice and men
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.admin.general
Date: 
Wed, 13 Sep 2000 14:35:22 GMT
Viewed: 
4364 times
  
In lugnet.admin.general, Scott Arthur writes:
> > Scott, would this have helped?
> 
> Anything which keeps marmite off my screen helps. ;-)
> 
> For the record, I really am in favour of compartmentalisation and all that.
> However, I am also aware that it tends to fragment threads (especially if one
> read via a news reader). If I thought my post would start a long rambling
> thread about marmite (or some other nonsense) I would not have posted it, or I
> would have moved it elsewhere. As my post was a straight answer to a straight
> question, I did not even think about it - my apologies to all read it:
> 
> http://news.lugnet.com/lego/direct/?n=733
> 
> However, to be honest I'm a little bemused as to how this has reached
> admin.general & how I got e-mailed about by big brother about it. It may be
> that, unbeknown to me, the "LUGNET POLICE"  are back to enforce the ToU - but
> I really hope not, as I do not what to see admin.general swamped with reports
> of seemingly malicious off-topic posts. Before anyone quotes the group's
> charter at me and tells me that Brad reads that group, I ask this - what is
> worse to the casual observer: me answering a straight question or James
> Brown's retort?

The casual observer usually isn't reading adminstrivia, so won't see my
retort - which, by the way, wasn't specifically targeted at you, or even at
the (3 or so?) off-topic messages in the specific thread I replied.  I've
noticed a fair amount of off-topicicity(?) in .lego.direct, including
arguments about being on-topic.

I was asking a serious question, specifically about the .lego.direct group,
since the injuction for all .lego groups(1) appears insufficient to keep
people on target.

Rereading what I wrote, it is fairly snide, and I apologize for that - I had a
nasty day at work yesterday, and took some of it out on you.

But the question still stands - Is there a server-side solution that can be
done (less snidely than my original suggestion) to keep .lego.direct
relatively free from off-topicity?

James

1:seen here, in the 'read this before posting' bit:
  http://news.lugnet.com/lego/



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: the best laid plans of mice and men
 
(...) lugnet.lego.direct, (...) Anything which keeps marmite off my screen helps. ;-) For the record, I really am in favour of compartmentalisation and all that. However, I am also aware that it tends to fragment threads (especially if one read via (...) (26 years ago, 13-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general)

20 Messages in This Thread:







Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

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