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 / 8360
8359  |  8361
Subject: 
Re: Is it time for lugnet.build.sculpture ?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.build
Date: 
Thu, 23 Nov 2000 00:20:30 GMT
Viewed: 
579 times
  
The issue with fractioning groups is that a fan must scan more groups to
find new MOC's.

I only build mini-fig style models, but I like to look at pretty-much
everything else.

I think that the mecha sub-group is a good idea because it is a HUGE
percentage of the MOCS out there.  However, there are a lot fewer sculpture
builders.

Because of this issue, I think that splintering the groups makes builders
more motivated to cross-post.  For instance, if I were to build a sculpture,
I would be tempted to post it both to the sculpture group AND build.

Interestingly enough, I find that a lot of people don't even scan "build."
Occasionally, I'll be naughty and sneak a MOC post into general or
something, and people will say something like "Hey - I didn't know you were
building all that cool stuff!"  In fact, I think I was actively posting on
LUGNET for about 6 months before I even found out about build.  If we
further sub-divide build, then this problem will become more acute.

That's my 2 cents.  I would prefer to see it remain all in "build," but I
don't intend to throw a big stink if they are split.

Brad


Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message
news:G4FtIv.Do@lugnet.com...
In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Kingsley writes:
Just a thought because of all the great Sculpture's that have been • showing
up lately from Eric H. and Henry L. and others.  It seems worthy to me
although I don't know about how others feel about further
compartmentalization.

I love the stuff and would like a good one step place to look to find • more
info just in case I decide to try my hand at sculpting in the future.

EricH, HenryL, etc. -- what do you think?  Would this help or would this
contribute to unneeded fragmentation?  Do you read .build reguarly?  If • not,
would you read a .build.sculpture regularly?

I think it's a great idea, but only if the advantages outweigh the
disadvantages.  The current .build group certainly isn't high-traffic, but
its .mecha subgroup has proven quite useful.

--Todd



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Is it time for lugnet.build.sculpture ?
 
(...) Maybe there sh/could be a direct link to .build from the LUGNET home page? "Check out what other fans are building, or post about your own creations!" (...) I think the problem is for people to *find* .build. Once they've gone that far, (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.build)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Is it time for lugnet.build.sculpture ?
 
(...) EricH, HenryL, etc. -- what do you think? Would this help or would this contribute to unneeded fragmentation? Do you read .build reguarly? If not, would you read a .build.sculpture regularly? I think it's a great idea, but only if the (...) (24 years ago, 22-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.build)

9 Messages in This Thread:




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

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

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