Subject:
|
Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Mon, 5 Mar 2001 20:56:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1555 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.nntp, Frank Filz writes:
> Are the web sales part of Shop at Home?
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.
> > Tell me again how auction noise belongs in a group named "swap"? :-o
>
> Remember, I was suggesting a lugnet.market.ebay. After this, the current
> auction traffic is approximately zero. Are you backpedalling from this
> statement:
No...(more below)...
> > > > I don't think it can still be true that auctions are frowned upon in the
> > > > same way that they once were, and I'm challenging the notion that they
> > > > necessarily need to be separated from straight sales.
>
> Basically my idea was that .swap was for all the small time relatively
> informal deals, be they straight sales, trade offers, or even
> mini-auctions.
Oh, see, to me "swap" means trading -- LEGO for LEGO -- maybe with money to
round it out. We talked about the advantages and disadvantages of "swap"
versus "barter" in a thread a couple months ago and came to the conclusion
that "swap" was closer to the intented use than "barter" was.
> > And auction flogs (or generally any type of obnoxious flog) would have to be
> > disallowed there, otherwise someone would get their friend to post a wanted
> > notice for them and they would respond to that with a flog.
>
> Are we really worried about people seeding requests?
I am, somewhat.
> Has that ever happened?
I don't think there's any way to know. As collective selling groups form,
however, the probability naturally increases.
> I'd hate to not be able to respond to someone who despaerately
> wanted some set which happened to be a real bargain over on some little
> known auction site (or even on eBay).
No problem -- just post your reply into the .auction group, dropping the
group it was asked in. Then FLOG AWAY there with reckless abandon! :-)
> If one is expected to not reply to
> the group about auctions, I'd even more expect that privately e-mailing
> the person about such and such an auction has the item they want would
> be even more frowned upon.
Hmm, why would that be frowned upon? That would be totally awesome! If
someone publicly posts that they're looking for something and someone
responds saying they've got it for sale via auction, that's absolutely
perfect (assuming of course that the person asking didn't say they didn't
want email replies).
> Let's step back and examine exactly why we need to treat auctions
> differently.
I'm not so sure anymore that we do, except for separation in a forsale area.
> There appears to be this fear constantly bandied about that
> someone will leave Lugnet because they happen to hear about an auction.
Not leave (gosh, that would be pretty extreme), but have a less-fun time.
> Well, I think if the guidelines limited the way the reference could be
> given (I think primarily that it should be low key) as below, that it
> won't be too bad. Again, are we really worried about people seeding
> requests?
I guess I'm concerned about line-toeing more than seeding, because it's more
obvious and it creates hurt feelings. Of course, the two can be combined.
> I guess. I have to say I'm pretty divided on debate issues. I think a
> certain amount of debate is good in the theme areas, but as soon as it
> starts to get "nasty" (as mentioned in another post), or starts to
> broaden or stray, I think it definitely needs to be moved. Given the
> difficulty of moving threads once they get well underway, I would prefer
> policies which moved debates to a .debate group (whether it be a single
> one or a LEGO related one and a totally non-LEGO related one), earlier
> rather than later.
OK, noting that for inclusion in the upcoming T&C draft revision.
> Oh no... how will I keep track of which articles I have yet to read to
> process into my mega links pages...
Say again?
> That's my concern for keeping nntp
> access somehow is that I have certain articles bookmarked currently by
> keeping them marked unread. If they are made no longer available by
> nntp, they're gone. I guess I've been taking advantage of Lugnet's not
> flushing them. I wish there was a way to more easily generate web URLs
> from the newsreader, that is one of the things which slows down my
> indexing (another one for anyone who might be watching is not preceding
> your URL with an http://, the newsreaders I use only create a clickable
> link if the http:// is present - if it isn't, I need to do something to
> get another browser window open, then cut and paste your URL in, after
> first remembering to clear the URL field in Netscape on Unix here at
> work...).
OK, what are you using to read news? Is your concern about losing articles
in NNTP related to getting caught up in places you're behind? That expiring
old articles would make it hard for you to get at them to get caught up?
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
| (...) 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
| (...) 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)
|
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
|
|
|
|
