| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Allan Bedford writes:
<mostly well considered and not disagreed to by me so I snipped it>
except for this:
> > But that aside. let's face facts. The lugnet.announce group IS over used and
> > every other poster to this thread (I think, with the possible exception of
> > one) agrees that most of what gets posted to lugnet.announce is off charter
> > and doesn't belong there.
>
> Larry. If you look above you say "let's face facts. The lugnet.announce
> group IS over used". But this is really just your opinion, isn't it?
No, it *isn't* just my opinion... it seems to be the opinion of the person
who wrote the charter. And he ought to know what he intended when he wrote
it. He didn't intend that MOC announcements appear in it. Since they have
become the bulk of what is there, the group is overused. QED.
That he *has* that opinion and that he (and Suz) determine what the charters
say and can speak authoritatively about what they were supposed to mean is
not my opinion. It's fact. So no, it isn't just my opinion.
> You don't present any facts to back it up.
But I have indeed done so in this thread.
I could give you the same cite I gave Scott, I guess. But if you make me do
it after what I just said, it starts to slide you over into his column in my
book, and probably that of a number of others. And that is a bad column to
be in if you want a reputation as a person worth holding discussions with.
Because it marks you as a person who wants to be argumentative for its own
sake instead of a person interested in moving discussion forward.
But as I said to Scott, I consider this question (of what the charter of
.announce is, and whether MOC posts "belong there" under the current charter
and whether the group is overused) settled, except for those that want to
argue for arguments sake, and I'd rather talk about how to make charters
more visible, how to encourage people to look and think (unlike you, I
suspect many people never actually look at charters, they go on what the
group name is, or post because they see others do it, or post because they
know that they will get exposure and probably get away with it) and conform
to the norms of the community, whatever they are.
So lets talk about that, or not at all.
Elsewhere in the thread, Dan has shown receptiveness to some of the
excellent visibility increasing suggestions made. That's great. Is it
enough? I don't think so. There needs to also be more acceptance of people
gently admonishing and guiding those that aren't conforming. That's a larger
problem, and the one that I'm most interested in, as it has direct bearing
on the health of LUGNET. (1)
You say, and rightly so, that your main interest is LEGO, not community.
That's fine.
But to me, to my hobby enjoyment, LEGO and LUGNET have in some part become
inseperable. I don't want to go back to the bad old days of RTL, or worse,
back to my basement to fondle my hoard all by myself, with only an
occasional email to some eBay seller to build community with.
Even if I were the worlds greatest LEGO designer (which I am, just ask me)
my designs would be much poorer without that community to draw ideas,
inspiration, and feedbac from, and more importantly, give back to.
Even if I were the most knowledgeable person in the world about LEGO (and I
am, just ask me, well maybe second behind Joshua Delahunty), my knowledge
would never grow richer without that community to draw from, and more
importantly, give back to.
Even if my collection was the most stunning, largest and most complete in
the world (and it is, at least to me... it lacks for nothing I want except
those things not yet released by LEGO that we all dream of) it would still
lack, and worse, it would lack in ways I would not know of. How would I even
know of my blue track set gaps were it not for Ben B.'s great resource on
the history of LEGO trains (which I just posted to lugnet.trains by the way,
and it's fascinating reading, but I digress).
Even if my circle of friends in the AFOL community was the largest (and it
is, I've met more people *personally*, *world wide*, than anyone else, I'm
pretty sure, although I'd love to meet someone who has met more of them than
I have), how could it grow wider still without the community that is LUGNET.
No, the health of LUGNET is very very important to me. Sometimes I may come
off as being a bit full of myself about community and maybe I don't always
do that gentle guidance that I advocate, coming off instead as a bull in a
china shop, but it's not because I don't WANT good things for our community.
I do. Deeply and completely. I'm just a bit challenged, sometimes.
And the health of LUGNET worries me more, much more, than the health of the
LEGO corporation itself. Not to belittle your crusade, mind you... I may not
agree with your points but you're doing a good thing with your lantern
seeking an honest man... but you see, I don't need TLC, I *have* enough
bricks. I can get by without TLC. My grandchildren will be opening MIB sets
30 years from now, of that I am sure, with or without TLC.
But I *can't* get by without the t.l.c. that this community provides (and
soaks up...) to each and every one of us who is engaged.
So stay. Do your crusade. But don't go dark here. This community can give
back to you what you put in it and more. It just will take a little work to
turn things around a bit.
1 - I despise the junior senator from NY but she was once quoted as saying
"it takes a village to raise a child"... which is somewhat apropos. It takes
an entire community to get a community to adhere to community norms. One
person, no matter how well intentioned, cannot do it. Even if that one
person is the admin who is doing it as a full time job with his entire heart
in it. The rest of us all have a role to play.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Bulk Lego Auctions
|
| I can only fully agree with your posting ... and have a question. (...) <mea culpa> This is exactly what I do. </mea culpa> My newsreader (Outlook Express for Mac) doesn't seem to offer a way to see the group charter. I know this is a weak excuse, (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Bulk Lego Auctions
|
| (...) I think this is where we may have gotten off track Larry. I *suspect* you may be very interested in having the charter(s) updated as a way of addressing your pet peeve(s). And this is should have been understood by me. It wasn't and I (...) (22 years ago, 5-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
38 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
|
|
|
|
