| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Call me elitist... (and I don't think I'm 100% disagreeing)
>
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Eric Joslin writes:
>
> > I guess, since I want to see Lugnet flourish, I am in favor of doing whatever
> > makes people most likely to become members, given the kind of person that • they
> > are.
>
> I'm not. That is, I'm not for enabling *everyone* to be a member. There are
> certain people I would be happy to see not join, heck, not even participate
> here. There are only a handful of them I can name, but we had a recent
> example of the sort of disruptiveness that can be caused by such.
Mmm. That'll teach me to go around not qualifying my statements.
Clearly, I don't think that the rules should be mutated too much to encourage
everyone (coughMatthewMoultoncough) to join up- on the other hand, if subtle
changes to structure can be made without changing Lugnet's overall mission or
attitude or flavor that *encourage* people to become members, then I am for
that.
For example: Someone's main interest is in advertising sales. They have no
motivation, currently, than to do more than post their sales to the market
groups. Why not make posting sale messages to market groups something you
can't do until you're a member? That is the best way to make that kind of
poster a member.
eric
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
| Call me elitist... (and I don't think I'm 100% disagreeing) (...) I'm not. That is, I'm not for enabling *everyone* to be a member. There are certain people I would be happy to see not join, heck, not even participate here. There are only a handful (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
90 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
|
|
|
|
