 | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) One quick thing I haven't mentioned in much detail yet: the way groups are coalesced currently in the web view will probably always be a default view, but there will be other views (customizable) and folders to store personal article (...) (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) Absolutely. --Todd (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A letter to Todd
|
|
(...) I'm with you on that. My only regret on this is not having made things clear to Brad and his people ahead of time. I have sent an apology and I hope there are no hurt feelings. --Todd (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) Agreed! I know Todd has requested some input in this regard: (URL) request which I've yet to have voiced my input on (although the message has been open on my desktop since it first appeared). (...) I was going to reply to this that I don't (...) (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A letter to Todd
|
|
(...) I second that! And add Suzanne's name there too! :] (...) Yes Mark, they do have "some real power". I'd rather not drag this major incident up, but I feel it is relevant---some may have forgotten it, and others may have never heard about it: A (...) (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A letter to Todd
|
|
(...) Mark, you posted a message to a public discussion group (several actually). If it was not meant to be an open letter, then perhaps you should have sent it directly to Todd via email. I do not think it was appropriate of you to inform Henry (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
Some thoughts from a loyal but non-member Lugnet participant: I believe I understand where Todd is coming from here, and I think that generally, the idea makes sense. Corporate involvement DOES dilute a true fan-based newsgroup. For an extreme (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) The lugnet.lego.foo for official posts and lugnet.lego.foo.d for discussion format doesn't work naturally with Lugnet. The reason is how groups are coalesced in the web view. I think it is valuable that it be easy to see just the official (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A letter to Todd
|
|
(...) Uh oh. Now the uproar is going to continue because you're only allowed to profane on LUGNET if you're in the good graces of the powers that be. And you're not. So I predict your posting privs will be yanked and you'll scream about being (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd and Eric's attitude (was Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
(...) It's probably some kind of record if you define the category narrowly enough so nothing else qualifies. But it's not the largest thread ever, or even the largest admin related thread, I don't think. (and that, I think, is a good sign) (...) (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd and Eric's attitude (was Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
(...) Wow finally some good stuff came out of this mass. This should be the 204th message of this thread - Is it a record for Lugnet? Thanks for the link LP! (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: A letter to Todd
|
|
(...) Todd, You probably wanted to just let this blow over, but I bet you could have spun the change more aggressively and avoided the uproar. I read your note. I didn't like it. I waited. I think that after reading your stuff -- but only when (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) I like the format of lugnet.lego.foo only for official postings, with automagic duplication into lugnet.lego.foo.d (iscussion) because I think it is more clear than anything else would be. But then you have a .lego.* group that we're al (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd and Eric's attitude (was Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
In lugnet.admin.nntp, Mark Papenfuss writes: <snip> Mark... drop it. Let it go, man. I let Eric get under my skin and I shouldn't have. This isn't about personalities or insults, it's about what's right for the fan community and what's right for (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: A letter to Todd
|
|
(...) True, point taken - I was more to borrow a word "grated" that the reply had really nothing to do with the post - I know it would be impossible to keep people posting a reply to it, and posting that would only make people reply more - which it (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Todd and Eric's attitude (was Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
(...) Todd, Eric is way out of line in many things, to a few different people, from what **I** have **seen** you have only agreed with him, and followed up on it yourself (do I need to point out the thread? Because this is *true* and not a (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) But you did the steps in the wrong order, and that's my major beef. -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) Bay Area DSMs (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) Thanks. I think it's time for everyone to step away anyway, some things are being said that probably are more divisive than they ought to be. The rest of this post is meta, that is, it is about how communication happens here, rather than (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Newsgroup structure: some tough decisions
|
|
(...) Yea, I don't think you can determine that, and thus I don't think that idea would work. I wonder how many people would actually object to someone getting a cut when they find a good price on an item? I certainly am willing to give the buyer a (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
|
(...) I have read through most of this thread and I totally agree with Todd on this. I also see the issue of AFOL to AFOL discussions in the .lego section a little more clearly now. This seems very simple and a very good idea to me. Discussions (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
