| |
Holy cow! I kept this message open on my desktop since it first
appeared so that I could think about it and then remember to reply
to it. It was message 317 in this group. The latest now is 680!
Brutal. Anyhoo...
In lugnet.admin.nntp, Todd Lehman writes:
> The lugnet.lego.direct group is special in that it is a direct communication
> channel with LEGO (or, more specifically, the business subunit of LEGO known
> as LEGO Direct, located in New York City). It's intended for two-way
> discussions with LEGO rather than about LEGO, and as such it isn't intended
> for fan-to-fan chatter. (Not that there's anything wrong with chatter -- it
> just shouldn't be happening in the .lego.direct area. Lots of other places
> for that.)
>
> The following is a proposal to reduce the level of chatter in the
> lugnet.lego.* newsgroups:
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
> Allow discussion in lugnet.lego.* between AFOLs and TLC employees (both
> directions), but not among AFOLs. That is, if you tried to post a follow-up
> in lugnet.lego.*, your post might be rejected. If this is the case, you
> could always post elsewhere. Here's the rule table.
>
> Existing Post Followup Post Accept or reject
> ------------- ------------- ----------------
> TLC employee AFOL Yes, accept
> TLC employee TLC employee Yes, accept
> AFOL AFOL No, reject
> AFOL TLC employee Yes, accept
Todd, I agree 100% that the chatter needs to be cut in this group.
I've griped about it on many occasions but couldn't find myself
useful enough to propose a solution. I must say I like your
automated idea (mine was leaning more towards appointing a moderator).
No doubt there will be some teething issues with the system, but we will
not know until it's tried. I say "bolt 'er up and let it happen"
(racer speak) :] I think this is a definite step in the right
direction.
> If the new article was going into lugnet.lego.direct (wholly or crossposted)
> then the headers would be checked for this. If the parent article (the one
> that the new one is replying to) was posted by someone from a lego.com email
> address, then they would be considered a TLC employee for the purposes of
> the above table; otherwise they would be considered an AFOL.
I would further disable any message from going into lego.direct
if it was cross-posted (either new or a reply). That group has
a very specific charter, namely:
> http://news.lugnet.com/lego/direct/?n=6
Thus, to me, by definition the content is not suitable for cross-posting
with other groups.
> We think this would be a workable solution. The biggest challenge is
> probably the wording in the error message when a message is rejected.
I would include a link to:
> http://news.lugnet.com/lego/direct/?n=6
in the rejection message, and perhaps your logic table above as
well as it's very clear. The message could be something like:
"The lugnet.lego.direct group is not intended for casual discussion
between LUGNET members. It is intended only for direct interaction between
LUGNET members and representatives of The LEGO Company. To keep these
exchanges focused, LUGNET members may not reply to messages posted
here by other LUGNET members. As well, messages in this group may
not be cross-posted from or to any other groups."
I don't like the term "LUGNET members" as technically the reps of
TLC could be such (and some are). But you get the idea.
Regarding my no cross-post idea..., what do you think of a mechanism
that will allow people to direct posts to a free-for-all discussion
in another group. I'm sure that many things that get said by a
TLC rep will spark many discussions in other areas. It may be
convenient that this FUT be set automagically. I guess it'd be
the NNTP equivalent of "Forward" in email..., how could that best
be done? The idea being that the person who wants to do this
can *choose* where it goes, versus just getting stuck with a
default group. To me the topics will be too varied to just stuff
them all into the same group for open discussion.
Also, how will your post filter act with a newsreader? Would someone
get an auto-response email, containing the error message, from the server ?
As an aside, I'm just slowly realizing here that this new filter
will lower chatter, but it does not prevent every single AFOL from
replying to one singular post from a TLC rep. One post from a TLC
rep could still see a couple hundred replies, much of which could
be considered "chatter". I don't know what could be done about
that, but for now I still think your ideas here are a move in
the right direction.
Regarding the lugnet.lego.* heirarchy..., I think it would be a good
idea to move lugnet.dear-lego (or something similar) under there.
That group does get a lot of traffic . Most
of it is stuff that also shows up in lugnet.general, etc., where I
really wish it didn't. Anyhow, I think a free forum where any
discussions about any aspect of TLC are welcome is a good idea. I
suggest putting it under lugnet.lego.* because, to me, first and
foremost that heirarchy is topicly focused on TLC. The .direct
subgroup will serve for direct interaction, whereas the .dear-lego
(or whatever) subgroup will server for AFOL discussion about TLC.
In light of the posting filters activated for TLC reps, it would
be something that they could participate in should they choose.
And it gives AFOLs a place to post all those pent-up thoughts
about TLC, rather then them spilling out into other groups.
I am king of compartmentalization! :]
In parallel to this, I think the lugnet.announce.lsahs should
go into lugnet.market.??? or lugnet.lego.market. I prefer the
latter because it keeps all the TLC sales stuff in one place,
and also where the TLC reps can post to them, and avoids confusion
with the non-TLC market groups.
I hope I've been helpful, or at least marginally coherent :]
KDJ
_______________________________________
LUGNETer #203, Windsor, Ontario, Canada
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
21 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- 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
|
|
|
|
