Subject:
|
Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Mon, 5 Mar 2001 13:30:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1396 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.nntp, Alison Pike writes:
> > * Add new group lugnet.rant or lugnet.lego.rant? Why or why not?
>
> 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 of the probelms or help if they know the
> seller/buyer.
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 entitled "LEGO Company," so lugnet.lego.rant
would imply rants about and/or directed toward TLC. Since the group would
be primarily for letting off steam (and, of course, TLC could still follow
it even if it's not inside the lugnet.lego.* area), I think it really
belongs as simply lugnet.rant -- and that has a nice, simple name; and it
also implies all types of community-related rants. Same with .rave -- let's
let it be raving about anything LEGO-related at or from TLC or within the
community. And we'll make it explicitly against the rules to rave about
your own train models (for example) for sale there, even if someone asks
about them. In other words, it should be a group for raving about other
people's stuff and about assorted LEGO products. I suppose even raving
about an old 1980's town set would fit in there, as long as it wasn't
actually a thinly veiled rant against juniorization.
I also forgot to say that I think with lugnet.rant, lugnet.rave, and
lugnet.lego.direct, we no longer need lugnet.dear-lego. The original
purpose of the .dear-lego group was for open letters to LEGO which may or
may not ever be read by someone at LEGO. Well, times have changed, and
seeing as LEGO is paying attention to virtually everything here in some form
or another, and seeing as there is the .lego.direct group, everything that
used to go into .dear-lego could just as well go into either .rant, .rave,
or .lego.direct, depending on how seriously it was intended. Seems like
everything in .dear-lego breaks down into three types of things:
"Dear LEGO, I really don't like the way..." -> .rant
"Dear LEGO, I want to say how much I enjoy..." -> .rave
"Dear LEGO, I want to be able to buy..." -> .lego.direct
If we deleted .dear-lego, it would also eliminate the confusion that people
have as to whether to post to .lego.direct or to .dear-lego (and in many
cases I've seen crossposting, which is probably OK but looks really goofy
because of the double 'lego' in the names).
The other problem with .dear-lego is that it was intended not as a
discussion group but as a thread-starter, but inevitably people posted
me-toos and other responses there. Things got the messiest there around
December 9, 1999, if you remember that gigantic misplaced thread. In
retrospect, the .dear-lego group probably should have had the requirement
that followups be directed to another group for discussion (as the .announce
groups do), but it's too late and also becoming moot now.
> I am more than happy to change the structure of Marketplace but with the
> groups suggested there could be a lot of overlap as until you know if
> someone else has want you want you don't know whther to put your comments in
> .swap or .wanted. Sometimes people do only want to swap and in those
> scenarios it would be useful and people could always put it in both.
That's an excellent point, and that's exactly the kind of abuse-magnet that
I'd like to avoid. Ambiguity breeds abuse. :)
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
| (...) 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 (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
101 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
|
|
|
|
