Subject:
|
Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Tue, 6 Mar 2001 04:03:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1250 times
|
| |
|
|
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 original intent was to provide focused discussions
in contrast to the state of RTL ca. '97, however by having so many specialized
areas it is hard to follow useful or interesting discussions (2) outside the
groups that
you usually read (e.g., in my case I wonder how many interesting Technic threads
are buried in some robotics group somewhere). The current structure forces
people to be more of a specialist than I suspect they really are.
>
> So, speak your opinions on these:
>
> * Add new group lugnet.rant or lugnet.lego.rant? Why or why not?
>
> * Add new group lugnet.rave or lugnet.lego.rave? Why or why not?
>
> * Add new group lugnet.debate? Why or why not?
No- I have commented on this previously
>
> * 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?
All one group, auctions, sales, trades are all the same thing
>
> * 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?
>
> * 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?
Yes, yes, yes, Less is more.
>
> * 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?
>
>
> I *especially* would like to hear your opinions if you haven't weighed in on
> any of these issues before.
Jim
(1) But I would add one top level group and I would make it the first group
listed...
(2) I changed my mind, there is no 2
|
|
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 (...) (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) !!
|
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
|
|
|
|
