 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Only post via the web interface? NO THANKS. I've posted maybe a total of 5 times via the web interface (and only because I was in a training class, not on any of my computers). Broken. (...) Then people would just watch the branches to make (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Hey, that's a good idea- if you pay to become a Lugnet member, you're allowed to voice your opinions. Sorry, Larry, I can't agree with that. (...) ...giving an automatic "last word" to the person who squeaks in under the post limit. (...) (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) I'll take some culpability here, I'm a sucker for trying to show up the clueless, and no matter how many times I swear it off, it's just too tempting... he's just so cluelessly annoying when he wants to be. (but he CAN be a good contributor (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) I agree with some of the philosophies about needing a place for off-topic things to spill, and needing a seperate place for them, etc, but I have to admit that I'm starting to wonder if there might not be a need to somehow restrict the posting (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
While I think many of the posts have been somewhat useless (not even entertaining!), there are still many posts that either make me think, or entertain me, so I'm all for keeping the group around. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Message-ID -> Article number
|
|
[redirecting to .admin.nntp] (...) I would really hate to see NNTP Message ID's floating around in HTTP URLs. A workaround is simply to use a standardized NNTP URL format -- for example: news://lugnet.com/qr...eos.uio.no That's postable as-is. Or, (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Excessive Cross Posting
|
|
(...) Yea, that's a real pain. Sometimes I go to the web interface to follow a thread since you see the whole thread there, but then when the thread gets too big, it becomes worthless to follow it on the web interface because it's hard to keep track (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Excessive Cross Posting
|
|
(...) There are reasons to keep a thread in multiple groups, see below. (...) Problem with requiring it on ANY cross posting is the discussions which legitimately belong in two or even three groups. (...) Because of how the web interface works (and (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Uselessness of .debate
|
|
Well, after another few weeks of .debate, I'm really really thinking I'm just going to abandon it, and honestly, more and more, I'm feeling it's a waste of Lugnet resources to have it. There are two constantly recurring shouting matches: - Scott vs (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Excessive Cross Posting
|
|
(...) I can't think of a practical example for putting multiple groups in the followup-to header. Maybe it's just me ??? I don't think jerk-proofing needs to be a *high* priority around here, although it's good to jerk-proof when it doesn't impact (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Excessive Cross Posting
|
|
(...) I've been that everyone. Typically, the reason I do a "reply to all groups" is because I'm arriving in the middle of a large-ish thread, I have no idea what ng's other people have been using,[1] so I just leave things alone, and reply to all (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Message-ID -> Article number
|
|
(...) I don't read the articles via mail, so the former is of little use, I'm afraid. And so is the latter, because I use Leafnode to read news offline. This means that the LUGNET articles get a different article number on my local news spool. So (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Elemental Challenge
|
|
(...) The raw IP stuff is because of our firewall. Whenever the firewall decides we need to re-authenticate, whatever http request being processed at the time gets converted/returned to the raw IP. I'll pay attention, and see what happens the next (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Message-ID -> Article number
|
|
(...) And via nntp, there's an xref header, for example, Dan's post has the following header: Xref: lugnet.com lugnet.admin.general:8506 (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Message-ID -> Article number
|
|
(...) while this might not be what you need, notice that messages you get via mail from lugnet have this header attached: X-Message-Archive: (URL) you can link to that message directly, or just as "lugnet.year.2002:24"... :) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Message-ID -> Article number
|
|
In USENET, an article is refered to by it's Message-ID. Now, LUGNET is not USENET, and here articles are normally refered to by the article number on the server. This makes it a bit hard for me (or anyone else who reads from the SMTP or NNTP (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: New newsgroup
|
|
(...) Can I direct you over to a related thread?-- (URL) free to post a flurry of ideas / suggestions / possible names there as they all interrelate. --Todd (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | New newsgroup
|
|
Todd, I realize you are busy with other things but I thought I would mention an idea I had. I have noticed there has been some excessive cross-posting in regards to movies due to the lack of a specific group. What about creating a ng called .movies (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: News search function temporarily disabled
|
|
(...) Yes, definitely! And the flags can link to country pages that list just the people in the country. (...) It actually won't incur extra overhead (amazingly, it will actually reduce overhead) to restrict things to hard or soft time ranges, so (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: News search function temporarily disabled
|
|
(...) Sorry for having contributed to wasted bandwidth, though I do hope you will give some thought to the ideas of splitting up the members list as I had suggested, and some kind of "recentness" limit to the search, though I realize that the (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
