Subject:
|
Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Mon, 5 Mar 2001 13:50:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3808 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.nntp, Todd Lehman writes:
> 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.
> [...]
> I'm rather dismayed as to how few AFOLs have come online outside of the
> U.S. since 1998. It's been a lot, to be sure, but I really expected 10
> times as many.
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 are no so fluent in.
Also, how to _know_ that lugnet exists? No Swedish magazines/newspapers have
written about lugnet (as far as I know), so how do you find it?
I just put in a search for 'lego discussion' at the main Swedish search engine:
http://evreka.passagen.se/query?q=%22lego+discussion%22&pg=q&kl=&what=web
and it didn't show anything from lugnet on the first pages.
I also did a search for 'lugnet', and again, nothing...
If you really _want_ foreign AFOLS to gather round the lugnet center, you
have to swallow your pride, and start to seed the search engines world-wide,
making sure the lugnet main page gets a _high_ score... Also try to get the
sites that reviews other sites to write about lugnet.
> [...]
> So, speak your opinions on these:
>
> * Add new group lugnet.rant or lugnet.lego.rant? Why or why not?
No opinion - I wouldn't read it anyway.
> * Add new group lugnet.rave or lugnet.lego.rave? Why or why not?
No opinion - I wouldn't read it anyway.
> * Add new group lugnet.debate? Why or why not?
As this would mean one more place where threads got FUT-ed, I disagree.
Beeing an off-line modem-connected reader, I just hate it when an
interesting discussion FUTs to some group I don't download - there is just
not enough time to start downloading a new group just to follow one thread,
and on-line reading is not an option for the moment. It's much easier to
skip some unwanted messages in a group I already downloaded.
> * 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?
Not beeing into the market thing, I can only say ISTM that this change makes
good sense.
> * How much and what type of flogging would you like to see in .loc groups?
> None? Some? Anything goes? Only certain types? Why or why not?
Sharing shop finds is OK. Repeated commercial activity should be in
.loc.se.market or some such.
> * Axe regional subgroups of lugnet.loc.xx and field requests for new
> subgroups on a country-by-country basis -- let them grow organically?
> Why or why not?
For Sweden - just cut them all. Only .loc.se has _any_ traffic (OK, perhaps
keep Stockholm, that's 12% of the population, but the group seems as empty
as the others...)
> * Move lugnet.trains.org to lugnet.org.train/ltc/etc., and move
> lugnet.castle.org to lugnet.org.castle, and move lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
> to lugnet.org.cad.ldraw (or something)? Why or why not?
Seems logical.
Just my 0.02 SEK
Anders Isaksson, Sweden
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
| 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 (...) (26 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) !!
|
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
|
|
|
|
