Subject:
|
Re: Why these news groups were created
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Wed, 22 Sep 2004 19:56:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
7021 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.nntp, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.nntp, David Koudys wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.nntp, John Neal wrote:
snip
| |
But isn’t that exactly what you do when you aren’t all inclusive of
creating all groups for every group instead of a token few?
JOHN
|
However, if certain people are uncomfortable posting in .general groups,
|
Uncomfortable posting what exactly?
|
“Hi! I’ve made a new moc! It’s a train car and it’s all rainbow coloured!
It’s somethign I decided to be creative with, and I wanted a symbol of my
homosexuality.”
Tell me how that would be received in .general, or .moc or anything not .lgbt.
| |
| |
or
certain people are uncomfortable reading about certain things in .general
groups,
|
That’s my point. Why should there ever arise that kind of situation? If it
is on-topic, what could possibly be the problem?
| |
shouldn’t there be sub groups made to allow for such discussions to take
place, taking these issues away from .general?
And if many of us are comfortable discussing stuff in .general, then why add
unneeded groups to the mix?
|
I assume you are talking about on-topic subjects that would belong in
.general. Yes?
| |
Again the example is .org and .loc--I mean I know that many people read
.rtltoronto for whatever reason, and those that read it know that LEGO is a
topic that doesn’t show up in many posts. THankfully Todd lets us get away
with it ;)
But isn’t it better to have Toronto Tangents relegated to .rtlT than to have
them posted in some sort of .general NG?
|
Well, in theory, they are BOTH TOS violations.
|
Are they? You’ve been to rtlT. Are we in violation of the TOS? Y’know,
besides the anagram incident of ‘00? (am I right? was it that long ago??)
| |
| |
Just as isn’t it nice to have a
specific .singles group now for me to post in instead of going on about my
singleness experiences with LEGO in the .general group,
|
Uh, don’t you mean the .people group?
|
.people.singles. I truncated
| |
| |
so those that want to
limit their reading and posting to only .general topics aren’t innundated
with ‘Dave Tangents’?
|
Not necessarily at all.
|
I aim to please the masses
| |
| |
I dunno. I don’t forsee this NG becoming as compartmentalized as the alt.
NG’s due to the inherent general interests of the LEGO fan, but some
compartmentalization may facilitate a ‘comfort zone’ for individuals who are
uncomfortable ‘lettin’ it all hang out in .general.‘(1)
Dave K
1- who doesn’t seem to be uncomfortable anywhere in LUGNET...
|
I am getting uncomfortable with people getting too comfortable in public
groups on LUGNET.
JOHN
|
Dave K
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) Well, are you talking about discomfort for the poster or the group reading the post? To assume that everyone in .general is a "homophobe" is a bit extreme. If don't care for his post, he will never know about it if I post nothing in reply. (...) (20 years ago, 22-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
| (...) Uncomfortable posting what exactly? (...) That's my point. Why should there ever arise that kind of situation? If it is on-topic, what could possibly be the problem? (...) I assume you are talking about on-topic subjects that would belong in (...) (20 years ago, 22-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
151 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
