Subject:
|
Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Tue, 6 Mar 2001 16:29:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1212 times
|
| |
|
|
Hello Todd, hello everybody,
> So, I'd like to whack ALL of the subgroups of ALL of the countries except
> for .loc.us (which enjoys relatively heavy use) and what remains of .loc.uk
> (or maybe even those too).
>
> This could mean deleting as many as 387 newsgroups.
Go ahead and do that. In the case of Germany, I have wondered from the very
beginning, how we three or so online AFOLs in the Stuttgart area should fill
a newsgroup. Traffic in the loc.de newsgroup is currently about one posting
per day. I would like to see more, ...
> Apart from the simple practical gains (fewer groups means simpler
> subscriptions) if we proceeded with this, we would also be able to handle
> ad-hoc expansion of .loc areas nicely. What I mean by this is having
> subgroups of .loc areas be for topics in a specific native language. I
> seem to remember that someone in .loc.it once asked for a .robotics
> subgroup where they could talk about robotics in Italian, but I complained
> that the .loc area is for localities and not for topical divisions. If we
> changed this rule and let each country define its own subgroups, free from
> regional distinctions, I think it would be a lot healthier for those local
> communities.
... and then start thinking of a new hierarchy along these lines at 50 or
probably even more postings a day.
> That is, if there were no .org area, LUGs would naturally fall into
> the .loc area, if they could.
This solution probably causes the least problems, because the main purpose
of a Users Group is to organize people who live close enough together to
meet frequently. Of course, if I am, for example, into trains, I will
probably also be interested to see which other groups have the same topic.
Could that be solves with the tiers you mentioned earlier?
> * 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?
I personally would not need any of these, but if other people want them, I
would also see no reason NOT to have them.
> * 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?
Clearly pro here.
My guess is there will be so many postings in each of these that we will
sooner or later want subgroups to separate Castle, Town, Train, Technic, ...
sales as well as want ads.
I think most people want to sell or get some specific set from some
specific, but are less concerned about how exactly the sale is being
organized. That's why I am not completely convinced whether it makes sense
to have the swap group at all. Would someone who actually wants to swap this
set for that set really be opposed to selling the one he has, and at the
same time buying the one he wants from someone else, maybe even for the
exact same price? Wouldn't it, then, make a lot more sense to post the set
he has in the .forsale group, linking to the other posting for the set he
wants in the .wanted group, of course making clear in both postings the
boundary conditions?
> * 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?
Tips on things that are on sale somewhere in my area would be welcome.
Offers or auction links within the country I live in would be welcome.
If any of these becomes too frequent, I would want a subgroup added.
> * 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?
Clearly pro, as outlined above.
In addition to that, all the European countries could have a common
newsgroup loc.eu, with all the European loc.xx groups moved into the new
loc.eu.xx hierarchy. Maybe the same also makes sense for other parts of the
world, but I will let those people talk for themselves. Given the facts:
- that we in Europe will have a common currency in less than a year
from now
- that loc.*.market groups seem now feasible (I would like to have
loc.eu.forsale and loc.eu.wanted right now!)
it seems especially important for Europe.
> * 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?
Con, as outlined above. I would rather kill the .org hierarchy, and move
whatever is really used there into either the .loc hierarchy, or (in case of
worldwide organizations) the appropriate themed hierarchy. IMO, it does not
really make sense to duplicate the loc.* hierarchy of countries in the org.*
hierarchy
Greetings
Horst
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
