 | | Re: lugnet.alphateam
|
|
(...) I mean that with a lowercase "t" -- town and not necessarily Town. --Todd (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.town, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.alphateam
|
|
(...) I just double-checked the Alpha Team set numbers, and noticed that they're in the 677x range. That says they're not necessarily Town (which is 6300-6699) and also that it's probably going to be short-lived. But then again they're almost (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.town, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: Reducing the level of chatter in lugnet.lego.direct
|
|
(...) If you do this, please create a newsgroup (lugnet.lego.direct.talk perhaps) where such AFOL-AFOL messages are encouraged to be sent. --Bill. (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
|
(...) Sorry I've got no real opinion on this... (...) I'd rather have things stay the same, and move anything that is not a *straight* sale /trade to .auction (stricter rules for the .b-s-t group) Perhaps make additional group(s) for places as ebay (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
|
(...) definitely add these three if for no other reason than to give us somewhere to boot people who keep posting this cr*p in our other ng's (...) well, i like monitoring only one ng, buy-sell-trade, but even if split up (which it really should) it (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: New Bulk Ordering Newsgroup?
|
|
Todd: My apologies for not getting back to you sooner - I'm catching up on my reading today. (...) Well, really just general discussion of the bulk products. I don't think that everything that is said about bulk bricks really needs to go to Lego (...) (24 years ago, 7-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
|
Dave Low <stinglessbee@hotSPA...Email.com> wrote in message news:G9t0tt.5BE@lugnet.com... (...) (.loc.au.vic), (...) 1 per (...) think (...) level. >> > Even if we get our LUGs in the .org hierarchy (below), I think we still >> >need state groups (...) (24 years ago, 7-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
|
(...) I think that lugnet.debate would be useful for on-topic controversy (eg perennial faves "does Lego encourage violence?", "why are all minifigs yellow?", "how much does juniorisation suck?"). It should be a default skip-filter though, as should (...) (24 years ago, 7-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
|
(...) I agree with Ross. Archive all sub-state groups, retain loc.au.xxx (state-level groups), allow posting at state-level groups (for "who's booking the meeting hall?" type questions). .org.au seems to be working okay for organisation/market (...) (24 years ago, 7-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
|
<snip> (...) praise. (...) Go ahead you've got my vote on both. <snip> (...) Perfect, I'd subscribe to it in a New York minute! <snip> There was a thread a couple months ago about possibly reorganizing the (...) Actually I think that doing this (...) (24 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
