LUGNET NNTP Server & Clients : 261


Administrative / NNTP / 261

Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

I'd like to kick off a discussion about the current state of the newsgroup structure here -- missing groups, unnecessary, groups, annoyingly or confusingly named groups, etc. The goal of this discussion is to come away with a list of practical (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.announce, lugnet.org, lugnet.market.auction, lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, lugnet.loc.us, lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.off-topic.debate) !!

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Alison Pike

(...) Thanks Todd for giving us the opputunity to have input into this. I think .Rant is a good idea but would want people to be able to include probelms with specific sellers/buyers in .Marketplace so that the whole Marketplace community are aware (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) I'm glad you mentioned that. I forgot last night that lugnet.lego.rant (that is, placing it in the lugnet.lego.* subhierarchy) won't really work for the intended all-encompassing purpose of the group. First, the lugnet.lego.* hierarchy is (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

(canceled) —Eric Kingsley

(canceled) —Tim Courtney

(canceled) —Eric Kingsley

(canceled) —Tim Courtney

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Tim Courtney

Err... I guess I figured out how to cancel a web-posted message via my newsreader. :-) -Tim (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Ben Cox

* Delete lugnet.market.auction and lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade and replace these with lugnet.market.forsale, lugnet.market.wanted, and lugnet.market .swap? Why or why not? If you listed some sets you have for sale, and then put "willing to sell or (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) Ah yes, more confusion. Excellent question. If there were a good, standard, intuitive word for "I want to get rid of this," then I think that could certainly stand to do double duty for both .forsale and .swap. I'd hate to see excessive (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Lester Witter

(...) lugnet.market (...) How about supply and demand ? Software geek/MBA (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Paul Sinasohn

(...) lugnet.market.available lugnet.market.wanted Paul Sinasohn also an MBA LUGNET #115 (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Jon Kozan

(...) (I like Paul's) OR havesome/wantsome OR have/want OR outgoing/incoming OR outbox/inbox OR heressome/needsome OR helpyerself/gimme OR gottago/lookinfer :-) -Jon (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Jacob Sparre Andersen

Todd: (...) Why not. (...) Probably a good idea. Your arguments for it make sense. (...) I don't really read the market groups, but if it makes it easier to get people to keep market posts in the market groups, them I am all for the change. (...) I (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —David Zorn

(...) I would recommend 1 new group: lugnet.lego.rant/rave since I think they are best given the same weight and mostly because I fear people saying "compare the number of posts in rant v. rave and see how much Lego stinks now." We know that people (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) Ah, that's another advantage to their being top-level groups and not part of the .lego.* subhierarchy. I'm glad you pointed that out -- I hadn't seen that. I think it's important that they be separate groups because of their naturally separate (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Anders Isaksson

(...) You have to realize that the language barrier can refrain many from joining lugnet in the first place - if you don't know there are any local groups, which you can understand, you don't search for them through the main site in a language you (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Eric Kingsley

(...) I like the idea for all of these although I can see quite a bit of crossposting between .debate and the other 2. Maybe these groups should have restricted cross-posting? I.E. No cross posting at all or the only crossposting would be allowed if (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —William R. Ward

(My newsreader objected to my attempt to reply to Todd's original message, so I'm replying to a followup) (...) Lugnet.lego.{rant,rave,debate} get my vote. That makes it more clear that they are distinct from the non-lego groups. I'm not sure (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) Do you mean the kind of cross-org talk that happens in groups like lugnet.org and lugnet.org.xx, or the kind that happens when someone from one org posts in another org's group? I don't see a reason why lugnet.org couldn't and shouldn't still (...) (23 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) I just want to try to curb kneejerk reactions. It would be a big change, not without disadvantages, but I think for the better in the long run, unless I'm missing something. --Todd (23 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Dave Low

(...) I like the idea, so I'm piping up now ;~). One of the main reasons we asked for .org.au was to stop Australian .market-style flogs from getting lost in the USian traffic. This was always (IMHO) a fairly awkward solution, and I don't think it (...) (23 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.org.au)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Ross Crawford

(...) Hmmm. I'm not sure we need a .au.org. Couldn't we just have .au.LegOz, .au.SLUG, .au.BUG, .au.MUG, etc., with any national stuff just going in .au.LegOz? This forces people to think about which organisation they're posting to / about. (...) (...) (23 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.org.au)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Dave Low

(...) I'd be happy with .au.LegOz. I'd think regional LUG discussion could go in .au.nsw, .au.vic, .au.qld etc, avoiding too much clutter. Does .au.market sound like a goer (pending Todd's okay)? (...) (Belches happily.) (...) My monumental 99.95% (...) (23 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.org.au)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I like this, but it would be important that they were all presented together on the web page so that it was obvious they were similar in nature. (...) OK, so where will .nelug (for example) sit? If you slap it under .us it's too broad an (...) (23 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Dave Low

(...) (quoting (URL) think that lugnet.debate would be useful for on-topic controversy (eg perennial faves "does Lego encourage violence?", "why are all minifigs yellow?", "how much does juniorisation suck?"). It should be a default skip-filter (...) (23 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Eric Kingsley

(...) <snip> (...) No knee jerk reactions but I just wanted to clarify something in terms of the orgs and how they fit into this hierarchy. For example would NELUG fit into the hierarchy as lugnet.us.nelug or would it be something different? I have (...) (23 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Frank Filz

(...) Some disadvantages: - On browsers which present the newsgroup list as a hierarchical tree, it's nice to just skip the whole .loc hierarchy - An alpha sort of the newsgroups won't keep the loc groups together In fact, I've actually been (...) (23 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —William R. Ward

(...) I agree. Keep the .loc prefix. But it might be a good idea to move all the regional "org" groups under .loc, so there's only one geographical hierarchy. And then the train.org can be org.train - the org section would only be for worldwide (...) (23 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Eric Kingsley

Sorry this is quite a bit more than a couple of days. I guess we all got a bit distracted by our other discussion... (...) I guess as long as a lugnet.org group remains I am not to worried about this. (...) That sounds like it might be a little bit (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Larry Pieniazek

In lugnet.admin.nntp, Todd Lehman writes: <snip a whole bunch of thoughtful stuff that needs thinking about> One question now, more later. For groups being sunsetted is it uniformly an "archive it and start over" approach, or are there some groups (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) Good question. In all cases, I'd make sure the old URLs still worked in case there were links or references to old articles. Groups that had a significant amount of stuff to be moved would probably be reinserted as if they were new at the new (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Rose Regner

Todd Lehman wrote in message <3aa34df1.136496190@...et.com>... (...) I wish you would expand sale to two groups, Ebay and Non-Ebay. (...) How about having a definition that would exclude "for profit" posts. This way if you found a local sale or (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Rose Regner

r2 wrote in message ... (...) people (...) This statement is in reference to posts in theme groups. Rose (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) Is it possible to tell if someone is making a profit? Let's say they find a stash of 6769's (Fort Legoredo, originally an $85-$90US set) for $20US each and offer them for $30US each. --Todd (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) Definitely open to that idea. (...) But is it possible ever to know whether someone actually made a profit or not? --Todd (23 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Frank Filz

(...) Yea, I don't think you can determine that, and thus I don't think that idea would work. I wonder how many people would actually object to someone getting a cut when they find a good price on an item? I certainly am willing to give the buyer a (...) (23 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —William R. Ward

(...) Does it matter if they make a profit? If someone is going to go to a store and pick up some discounted set as a favor for someone, what's so terrible about them making a couple bucks on the deal? I think that very few AFOL's actually take in (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Shiri Dori

OK, I'm posting before reading most of the other replies... (...) Thanks for getting us involved, like Alison said. <skip to the end> (...) lugnet.rant and lugnet.rave, yes. A good place to voice opinions that would potentially annoy other people, (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) In the case of a pure move from one name to another, I'm pretty sure I could relocate all the content so that discussions could continue in the new place as if they'd always been there. --Todd (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Alan Findlay

(...) I like the idea already expressed for .rant/rave combined. (...) I agree with your reasoning on this one. It's a good idea. (...) This is the area I visit the most (after Castle). Your suggested change is very good -- it mimics how I think (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Eric Joslin

(...) I'm for both of these groups (ie, lugnet.rant and lugnet.rave). I think that your reasons for wanting them are valid. (...) Hmm. I'll be honest- I would rather see debates about Bionicle take place in the Bionicle newsgroup, than a general (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) Me too -- they belong right alongside regular Bionicle discussions, IMHO. The funny thing is, they belong more in a lugnet.debate than they do in lugnet.off-topic.debate. I haven't been successful yet (ever) at getting people not to have LEGO (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Eric Joslin

(...) Ok, to be more clear about it: I would rather see this problem dealt with than see the group made to try and cause it to happen organically. I certainly agree that on topic debates moving to lugnet.off-topic.debate is bad- for one thing, that (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Frank Filz

(...) So if I'm willing to possibly take a lesser offer, or willing to take a bunch of sets in trade, that's an auction? If there is a group which is strictly for "this is the price, first person gets it and giving me this exact amount of money is (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —James Brown

(...) There will always be gray areas and blurred lines. The only real way to avoid them is to jump to one extreme or the other- ie: either one group (.market.anything-goes) or a multiplicity of groups (.auction.ebay, .auction.private, (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) It's not -just- that, though... It's also that we don't have any "on-topic" type of debate group, just as for the longest time we didn't have any "on-topic" fun group. Uhh, that doesn't come out right. OK, what Shiri Dori wrote here: (URL) (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —James Brown

(...) I'm still not a big fan of auctions. I think/find that auctions in general (and ebay in particular) give the appearance that the market & collectability aspects of the hobby are more important/prominant than the building/community aspects of (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Eric Joslin

(...) What about lugnet.general? That's a basic group for talking about LEGO. Human interaction (in an NNTP type forum) only comes in so many flavors, and debate is a big one. (...) Uh. I didn't say that everything else *was* an auction, I just said (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) I'm concerned about seeing protracted debates in .general or other places. The .general group is (or should be) kept as "sacred" as possible as a friendly meeting spot. Well, .build should be even more sacred than general, for that matter, but (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Eric Joslin

(...) Umm. I dunno. If that's the kind of traffic you want to unload, then certainly a lugnet.debate group is the way to go. (...) Oh, ok. Well, then, I am useless to you, because I have no ideas. :D lugnet.not-a-straight-sale is unweildly. I (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Rose Regner

Lorbaat wrote in message ... (...) in (...) Any (...) What about market.auction and market.nonauction. I of course would like to see market.auction.Ebay, market auction.nonebay, market.nonauction(sales?), or market.non auction sale.buy trade Rather (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Dave Low

(...) I think that lugnet.debate would be useful for on-topic controversy (eg perennial faves "does Lego encourage violence?", "why are all minifigs yellow?", "how much does juniorisation suck?"). It should be a default skip-filter though, as should (...) (23 years ago, 7-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Kevin Wilson

Todd Lehman wrote in message <3aa3d748.171657156@...et.com>... (...) will (...) I don't think this issue is ever going to NOT be sticky - wherever you draw the line between For Sale and Auction, Todd, someone will misunderstand or disagree and stick (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —James Brown

(...) Sure. They can't hurt, and adding them gives you the coverage you need to toast the mostly obsolete dear-lego group. I'd suggest having them as just .rant and .rave instead of under the .lego.* hierarchy, to avoid implications that they're (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Rose Regner

James Brown wrote in message ... (...) replace (...) lugnet.market (...) I have to "me too" on this post. James has stated me feelings on this quite well. I generally don't even go to auctions, but then I miss the personal auctions that people run (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Richard Noeckel

(...) I aggree with James, leave Canada's local groups as is! Canada and the U.S. should be left with their subgroups! Please don't take away loc: Canada, Ontario, Toronto! Richard (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Kevin Wilson

Todd Lehman wrote in message <3aa34df1.136496190@...et.com>... (...) Some of the CN groups have reasonable amounts of activity too, and I wouldn't want to see them go away. Vancouver would have more except that a lot of the local discussion happens (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) Whoops, sorry about that. Right. It's not just the U.S. where the finer granularity worked out. --Todd (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Dwayne Towell

(...) flogs. (...) OK, this isn't an answer to one of your specific questions, but I will comment about these ideas anyway. I see no need to separate .forsale from .swap. Everything I have forsale is also available for swap and vice versa. Actually, (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Gino A. Melone

(...) I agree with the comment that it shouldn't be under .lego. Otherwise, this sounds like a good way to deal with the type of comments you describe. (...) Ditto my comments about .rant. Plus, I'd recomend a name change. The term rave has certain (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) What are those connotations? You're making me feel old. :-) Other than spontaneous all-night slam-dancing with techno trance house musing and things of that ilk, I'm not aware of other meanings of the word "rave." I don't think there's (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Rose Regner

Gino A. Melone wrote in message ... (...) moderate I disagree on this one. The Idaho group has not seen much traffic, but then again there aren't many of us. As LUGNET membership gets larger, I would expect our Idaho group to become active at some (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) Hi, don't worry...this was mainly about .loc subgroups outside of the US and Canada... --Todd (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —William R. Ward

(...) I agree. But "rant" doesn't really go with "praise" - how about "whine" instead? That might also keep people from taking themselves too seriously when posting there, if they're "whining" instead of "ranting". (...) In another thread, the term (...) (23 years ago, 10-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Alex Farlie

(...) Ok, Could you add a TOS/T&C comment regarding April Fool's and other speculative type postings.. I know that on the posting page it clearly states that you agree not to submit " false,fradulent,incomplete or decpetive information.". However, I (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) That's an interesting point. I hadn't realized that April Fool's Day hoaxes that don't contain a disclaimer are actually violating the T&C. (...) That's good or bad? --Todd (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Alex Farlie

(...) A good thing (if the posts are clearly marked.) :-). However I am not sure what a suitable disclaimer wording would be. I also suggested having a seperate group for speculations of the 'Article from tommorow' type nature so that people reading (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Frank Filz

(...) I'm curious where this statement is, I can't find it. Frank (23 years ago, 25-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —

Todd Lehman

(...) I'm not aware of anything in the TOS/T&C[1] about this either. Alex may be thinking of the news-posting setup form[2], where there is a checkbox that says: "I swear that all the information I am submitting on this page is correct and that I am (...) (23 years ago, 25-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.admin.terms)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Right... so users promise that the info they give about themselves is true, but not that information in particular posts is. Since we're coming up on April, I guess I think that's a good thing! (even though I am convinced I have "sucker" taped (...) (23 years ago, 26-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.admin.terms)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Frank Filz

(...) It may also have been a misreading of this statement: (...) I've got some very mixed feelings about the April Fools jokes. This has been kicked off by the current business with the supposed NGLTC highway cleanup sign. One thing I'm really (...) (23 years ago, 26-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.admin.terms)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Frank Filz

Ok, some initial thoughts.... I was opposed to a .rant type group earlier, I now see that it could be valuable. One question though is how to get the ranting to move there. I don't think we can eliminate initial rants in response to an announcement, (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) Oh, I don't think there would be a problem with that! :-) (...) Why and how? If the group didn't allow follow-ups from other areas, then people would just get around it by posting their follow-up rant in another area, defeating the purpose. Or (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Frank Filz

(...) Are the web sales part of Shop at Home? I was originally going to suggest Shop at Home, but then I thought about the web sales. Of course the other question is where do the LICs, outlets, etc. fall? Deals there probably should be posted in the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) To the best of my knowledge, yes. LEGO Shop at Home (both online and offline) is still run by Steven Hawco, who started it some 15 years ago. Steven Hawco reports to Brad Justus. (...) No...(more below)... (...) Oh, see, to me "swap" means (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Frank Filz

(...) Yea, that is a problem with using "swap", I guess one factor for me in not breaking it down too much is that while a number of offers are clearly auctions, there are just a few which are pretty strictly trades, and everything else is somewhere (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —William R. Ward

(...) I really like the idea of adding .ebay, .brickbay, and .lego-direct (but call it .shop-at-home or .lsahs) categories. However instead of .swap and .swap.updates I would suggest .barter, .forsale, and .wanted. --Bill. (23 years ago, 10-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Tony Hafner

(...) Yes, please. I would love to see this move out of the usual theme areas. I have no opinion on whether it belongs under .lego or not. (...) I like this idea. I was thinking about posting some sort of rave this morning. I am concerned, however, (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Ross Crawford

Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:3aa34df1.136496...net.com... (...) Hmmm. I tend to think it's generally a good idea, but are people gonna use it? I think you're still gonna get general Lego ranting & raving in .general, but (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) Ahhh--BINGO! Those are *very* *nice* and *short* name components!!! (...) So you're saying?--deleting the super-lower-level metro groups in .loc.au would be (possibly) a step forward but deleting the state-level groups loc.au.xxx would be a (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Ross Crawford

Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:3aa41e91.189907...net.com... (...) (.loc.au.vic), (...) per (...) think (...) Even (...) yep, basically I think that would work well _with .loc.au_ other countries may vary. (...) in (...) (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Dave Low

(...) I agree with Ross. Archive all sub-state groups, retain loc.au.xxx (state-level groups), allow posting at state-level groups (for "who's booking the meeting hall?" type questions). .org.au seems to be working okay for organisation/market (...) (23 years ago, 7-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.loc.au)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Ross Crawford

Dave Low <stinglessbee@hotSPA...Email.com> wrote in message news:G9t0tt.5BE@lugnet.com... (...) (.loc.au.vic), (...) 1 per (...) think (...) level. >> > Even if we get our LUGs in the .org hierarchy (below), I think we still >> >need state groups (...) (23 years ago, 7-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.loc.au)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Julie Krenz

In lugnet.admin.nntp, Todd Lehman writes: snip ... (...) Lets clear up what is allowed. I think posting that you have parts for a theme up for sale should not be allowed. Parts are whatever you make of them, most parts can be any theme you want, (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Thomas Garrison

(...) My personal view/wish: I think the whole .bst/.auction area should be replaced with theme-specific market groups. Little advertised fact: not everyone on LUGNET is a generalist! I do not read .bst or .auction despite knowing that I'll be (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Kevin Wilson

TWS Garrison wrote in message ... (...) replaced (...) on (...) that (...) deal (...) Town (...) I like the idea of theme-specific market groups, though not to replace the general ones. Cross posting might not be so terrible: if something really is (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Mark Koeberl

(...) I have mixed feelings about trying to apply order in matters of speech. I appreciate trying to make things orderly, and by segregating posts to areas they would be sought in would avoid flames from people who have to wade through messages (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) Someone suggested a .market.feedback group. Is that what you mean kinda? --Todd (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Jim Hughes

There are entirely too many groups now. If you condense the .loc groups there are still too many groups. Condense the top level groups as much as possible (1), eleminate most of the subgroups. Combine some of the theme groups. I appreciate that the (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Jonathan Mizner

Interesting ideas. I look forward to the changes coming to Lugnet. Being serious, I think the Rant newsgroup should be .racers. Or something else that clearly implies the rant and upset-at-Lego sentiments immediately. Just a suggestion that likely (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Kyle D. Jackson

(...) Wow. Well thanx for starting this discussion up Todd. It focuses into one thread what a lot of people have been talking about on and off for some time. I've read all the posts that are available and found about 15 that had a point in it that I (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Horst Lehner

Hello Todd, hello everybody, (...) Go ahead and do that. In the case of Germany, I have wondered from the very beginning, how we three or so online AFOLs in the Stuttgart area should fill a newsgroup. Traffic in the loc.de newsgroup is currently (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Kirby Warden

(...) I'm not sure it would be a good idea to add either of these groups. On the surface it seems great...but I see a potential let-down. When I read discussions in Lugnet, it seems to me that positive and negative conversations add to the (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Todd Lehman

(...) Nonononono, nobody would be required to post raving praise to .rave; the rave area would just be safe haven for raving -- a place where you can't (shouldn't) be chastised for saying nice things, or where you can go to always read nice things. (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Kenneth A. Drumm, Ph.D.

<snip> (...) praise. (...) Go ahead you've got my vote on both. <snip> (...) Perfect, I'd subscribe to it in a New York minute! <snip> There was a thread a couple months ago about possibly reorganizing the (...) Actually I think that doing this (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Paul Hartzog

(...) definitely add these three if for no other reason than to give us somewhere to boot people who keep posting this cr*p in our other ng's (...) well, i like monitoring only one ng, buy-sell-trade, but even if split up (which it really should) it (...) (23 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Jan-Albert van Ree

(...) Sorry I've got no real opinion on this... (...) I'd rather have things stay the same, and move anything that is not a *straight* sale /trade to .auction (stricter rules for the .b-s-t group) Perhaps make additional group(s) for places as ebay (...) (23 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Kyle D. Jackson

(...) So post in it then. That probably sounds facetious. But if it's the .market group for all of LUGNET regardless of country, then use it. I post to it for things from Canada. I just make sure I identify the country to avoid confusion. I wish (...) (23 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Kerry Raymond

(...) replace (...) lugnet.market (...) No problem with having a separate .wanted and .swap, but I'd like to preserve a distinction between "fixed price" sales and auctions (and other non-fixed price sales) for a number of reasons. Auctions (...) (23 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.loc.au)

Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions —Timothy Culberson

I'm a little late coming on this discussion topic but I thought I'd add my thoughts anyhow. I'd be interested in your current thoughts on this issue Todd, after reading so many responses.....not that I doubt you'll keep us all well aware of your (...) (23 years ago, 10-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)