Subject:
|
Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Tue, 6 Mar 2001 17:19:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1283 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.nntp, Todd Lehman writes:
> snip<
> * 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?
I'm not sure it would be a good idea to add either of these groups. On
the surface it seems great...but I see a potential let-down. When I read
discussions in Lugnet, it seems to me that positive and negative
conversations add to the substance. Here's what I see...
Todd posts an article about TLC's newest license agreement. If Bob has
something positive to say about it ("wow, that's great news, the potential
here is staggering!"), he has to post directly to .rave. If Ted has
something negative to say ("This really bites, just one more step down the
road to Armageddon."), he has to post to .rant. If anyone wants to see
what others have to say about the information, they have to go to .rant or
.rave. Commenting on other people's posts becomes difficult as .rant and
.rave is loaded with dozens of topics daily.
As things are with discussions, I think they should remain.
When I read Todd's or Suzanne's informational posts, I fully expect to
read positive and negative comments. To me that's what defines a
discussion. Now and then things get somewhat mean because someone didn't
really think about what they were posting...but no one's perfect.
I think seperating positive and negative discussion into seperate
groups effectivley kills discussion as a whole.
If someone gets out of hand, they will be advised to calm down and be
more cautious or their membership (I assume) will simply be eliminated.
>
> * Add new group lugnet.debate? Why or why not?
This sounds like a good idea for those people who find themselves
arguing with each other within a discussion. I've seen this happen a few
times. A discussion does not always turn into an argument, but when it does
lugnet.debate would make a good place to forward those posts.
>
> * 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?
How about adding swap to forsale and
wanted...lugnet.market.forsale/swap, lugnet.market.wanted/swap (or something
like that?). This would effectively eliminate the potential cross-posting.
I don't see too many people willing to simply swap their pieces. From what
I've seen, most folks either intend to make a profit from their collection
or want to keep everything...just in case... Some people may change their
mind about swapping once they learn they could actually make a small sale.
>
> * 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?
Uh, sorry, I'm not familiar with how the word flogging is being used
here, I don't have a dictionary at hand and the only definition I know of
has to do with whips.
>
> * 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?
I'm not into the subgroups yet. But someone posted here earlier saying
that getting rid of some local groups would be good as they could be
reintroduced later if demand arose for them. I agree with this.
>
> * 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 don't think I'm prepared to comment on this as I'm still pretty green
to Lugnet and have not yet become familiar with some of these groups and
their organization.
>
>
> I *especially* would like to hear your opinions if you haven't weighed in on
> any of these issues before.
Thanks.
>
> Thanks,
> --Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
| (...) Nonononono, nobody would be required to post raving praise to .rave; the rave area would just be safe haven for raving -- a place where you can't (shouldn't) be chastised for saying nice things, or where you can go to always read nice things. (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
