 | | Re: Does lugnet.castle.org really need to exist?
|
|
(...) Is it getting in the way? (...) Well, we could make it non-postable-to (read-only) but it'd hate to just delete it altogether once it has posts in it. --Todd (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Does lugnet.castle.org really need to exist?
|
|
(...) I agree that deleting it is bad, and it even potentially serves a future purpose. It would be a good place to discuss the castle equivalent of the Piratefest that is being planned (keeping the discussion accessible to castle folks yet out of (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Does lugnet.castle.org really need to exist?
|
|
(...) I'm guilty of posting to the .castle.org group when I meant to post to the .castle.org.cw group. It's a slip that's just too easy to pull off and I bet that 95% or more of the .castle.org postings/replies were meant for the .castle.org.cw (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Does lugnet.castle.org really need to exist?
|
|
(...) Its purpose is actually for talking about Castle-type organizations and related activities whether those organizations exist or not -- i.e., to help organize new organizations -- meta discussions. So it's intended to be a dead-traffic group (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
