 | | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
|
(...) 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) (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
|
(...) 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 (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
|
(...) 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, (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
|
(...) 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 (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
|
(...) 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 (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
