 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) <puts facilitator hat on> No no... post your ideas, no matter how wacky, as long as they haven't been posted yet. That's brainstorming. Even if you know there is a flaw in idea E1 and E2 of yours, and in L1 and L2 of mine, someone may come up (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Actually, those two are great ideas, IMHO. I wonder how many people that aren't members post updates about their LEGO eBay auctions on Lugnet, and never give back to the upkeep of Lugnet... I hadn't ever thought of that before. And the admin (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Hear, hear! Though I don't expect that I'll switch to Libertarianism or Christianity any time soon, I have learned a good deal about those two views. That, for me, is the primary reason for participating in .debate (that, and getting the (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) The recent history of .debate is certainly that the types of shouting matches have little chance of being productive, however, I will point out that back some time ago, the "Libertarian" debate DID have real productivity. It DID change (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Well, as soon as I can come up with an idea that I myself can't pick apart on 1000 levels, I will. Unfortunately, thus far I've been unsuccessful... (...) Yeah, but that's the default way of "winning" an argument or flamewar on Usenet. :D (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:>>Hey, that's a good idea- if you pay to become a Lugnet member, you're allowed (...) I'm not yet a member (mainly because most of my posting has been to OT rather than LEGO-specific contributions), (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Dot view parameterizable?? (Re: Excessive Cross Posting
|
|
(...) I would like to put into the enhancement hopper the idea of setting a personal preference for how big the tree view should be allowed to get before it is suppressed. I'm willing to pay a bit more delay to get larger trees, some others may want (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Personally, I come and go. I lose interest in some debates, and gain interest in others. Occasionally I'll see something that really does peak my interest, and other times, I just feel like debating. As to whether it's actually a waste of (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) I wasn't clear enough. I was looking for some brainstorming on possible solutions first before we trotted out the sharpened knives to rip holes in the ideas. All the ones i posted were dreamt up in about 5 minutes total to act as thought (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
I *said* they had flaws and were thought starters... so you'll see a smiley behind every one of my responses, I'm trying to be funny in them. I suggest you post some ideas of your own, I'm trying to get some brainstorming going... (...) Why not? (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
