 | | Re: lugnet.market.mess
|
|
(...) I fail to see the problem with .announce.moc - the MOC's are a subset of announcements. There is no discussion in .announce. I agree that they should be separate, but I don't think that's a good analogy. (...) I disagree with the idea of (...) (23 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.market.mess
|
|
(...) .announce.moc was CREATED to keep traffic out of .announce. It basically (due to the technology) fails to do that for web users. Point your browser at .announce and you see announce.moc traffic as well. Simple as that... it fails to keep (...) (23 years ago, 23-Apr-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.market.mess
|
|
(...) I wonder if it's time to change the default. I'm thinking the main place where I would see value is when the subgroups shouldn't really exist in the first place, such as some .loc groups (the way NC works for example, we would actually be (...) (23 years ago, 23-Apr-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | lugnet.announce.moc [was: Re: lugnet.market.mess]
|
|
(...) I believe the main reason was not so much to avoid that problem, as to keep MOC's from crowding other announcements out of the "top stories" sidebar on the LUGNET home page. I understand that lugnet.announce posts are given automatically (...) (23 years ago, 23-Apr-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.announce.moc [was: Re: lugnet.market.mess]
|
|
(...) While that may or may not be true, it's not the reason I was plumping for it at the time. My reasons were as I outlined, to keep dissonance down. But we digress. If I have X type things and Y type things and X is not a kind of Y and Y is not a (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
