 | | Cool LUGNET MOC of the Week (was: lugnet.announce is not for MOCs)
|
|
(...) An addendum to this idea of mine (I can't shake it...it's a good idea, so it's rattling around in my head...): If there were a lugnet.build.announce, everyone with a new MOC of any genré would post their MOC announcement there and in their (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Lego Auctions
|
|
(...) You asked how one is supposed to determine things. I answered. No critcism of your first post to .announce was intended, I've said (twice or three times now) that it fits the charter as it's written. I think the charter needs changing but (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Lego Auctions
|
|
(...) Is it true that there's no easy way? When I was viewing lugnet via NNTP I had my newsreader set to never discard posts (that was a long time ago, it took a lot less space than it would now) so I could go look at post #1 in a group without too (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.announce is not for MOCs
|
|
(...) A thought I have is to have a lugnet._.announce for each theme and probably some of the other areas also where folks could announce new MOCs or other newsworthy items related to that theme. It would then provide an easy place to go find just (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.announce is not for MOCs
|
|
"Matthew Gerber" <matthew@digitaliris.com> wrote in message news:GpDzIt.Ltw@lugnet.com... (...) fairly (...) content (...) across (...) made (...) Hey, I'm for it! -Tim (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Lego Auctions
|
|
(...) My apologies for making any assumptions. I wondered if the mail had perhaps bounced at the other end without generating an error at my end. (...) As mentioned (twice or three times now) I did, most certainly, read the charter for that group. I (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.announce is not for MOCs
|
|
(...) Well, lugnet.build can be rather high volume at times, and announcements can get lost in the noise. It's nice to have a place where MOCs can be announced with followups directed elsewhere. I'd like to see it under lugnet.announce.{moc,build} (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Lego Auctions
|
|
(...) I don't know what the ratios are as to who uses the web vs. nntp interfaces, but for people using nntp there is no easy way to access the charter of a newsgroup. --Bill. (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Shop At Home catalog Engine Shed
|
|
(...) If you're adding comments to the message as you add the other newsgroup(s), then I think it's reasonable. But to just crosspost it for the sake of spreading the word is in violation of the spirit of the lugnet.lego.* restriction. Whether you (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.announce is not for MOCs
|
|
(...) Not that my opinion counts for anything (since I haven't found the time to build a darn thing lately), but if I may, I would like to chime in with my support for the idea of lugnet.build.announce for strictly LUGNET-wide MOC announcements, for (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Lego Auctions
|
|
(...) Maybe your mail is being bounced silently on the way in or out? I sent you a complaint via email when you posted the second time but got no reply, leading me to believe you never saw it or your reply never made it back to me. (...) Read the (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.announce is not for MOCs
|
|
(...) Yes. Or maybe just lugnet.build... the announce is a bit redundant, perhaps. (...) It's not the low volume per se, it's the pithiness. Posts that appear there are indeed breaking news. When I want breaking news I would like to review .announce (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.announce is not for MOCs
|
|
(...) IMHO, this would be the better choice, to meld well with the current architecture. .moc.announce is counter-intuitive with what's currently in place. May I suggest that if an .announce.moc group is set up that it does not boost posts into the (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.announce is not for MOCs
|
|
(...) Well, lugnet.bulid.announce would be more appropriate in that case. No need to create a new top-level hierarchy. Do the brickshelf and LSAHS subgroups bother you in the web interface? Probably not, but only because of their volume of traffic. (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Shop At Home catalog Engine Shed
|
|
(...) If someone feels that a post in a .lego group has relevance to a particular theme or group (whether it be train or castle or what-have-you), why shouldn't they cross-post it? If that someone happens to be a LEGO employee without posting (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.announce is not for MOCs
|
|
"Ben Ellermann" <ben_289@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:GpDuBw.50H@lugnet.com... (snipped newsgroup comments, see what Larry just wrote) (...) can (...) Hey, that's ok. We don't expect new people to be up to snuff on all the norms around here. (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.announce is not for MOCs
|
|
(...) Me too. Note please that this doesn't necessarily have to be Todd and Suz. (or Steve or Jen or Dan) There are other people who would be willing to take some of the load if empowered to do so. As James Brown said, administration is not (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.announce is not for MOCs
|
|
(...) I thought of a similar idea yesterday (lugnet.moc)after reading about this problem. Lugnet.announce.moc would be great because it would allow us to post all new MOC's together and in their respective newsgroups. Then a person who visits lugnet (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.announce is not for MOCs
|
|
"William R Ward" <bill@wards.net> wrote in message news:m2advvcf1p.fsf@...rds.net... (...) I agree. I was reading the 'top 1000 noisemakers' thread, one of them referenced back to a post where Todd compiled a list of posters in the .cad groups. It (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.announce is not for MOCs
|
|
(...) Lugnet has gotten by just fine without moderators, but that's because historically the admin(s) have been there to step in and say "don't do that" and even delete messages if needed. If it is expected that admins will continue to play a less (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
