Subject:
|
Re: lugnet.market.mess
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Mon, 22 Apr 2002 20:34:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1319 times
|
| |
|
|
TWS Garrison <tgarriso@math.purdue.edu> writes:
> > > William R Ward wrote:
> > > > 2. The charter of all other lugnet.market.* groups should be
> > > > amended to say "No posting of ads, including bricklink stores,
> > > > ebay auctions, or other announcements of LEGO for sale by the
> > > > person posting or any organization that he/she represents."
>
> It would be nice to implement this for all groups that do not explicitly
> opt for ads. . .
I think for the most part this is already true.
> > > > 6. Remove .auction or make it a subgroup of .ads. Discussions
> > > > about ebay policies and the like can go in .theory if the
> > > > group is made a subgroup of .ads.
>
> Huh? Why make .theory a subgroup of .ads? There's no reason for ads to
> be posted to theory, except for illustrative purposes.
That's not what I meant. I am sorry about the ambiguity. Let me
rephrase: "Discussions about ebay policies and the like can go in
.theory if .auction is made a subgroup of .ads"
> Also, I'd imagine that .services would be the place for discussion of Ebay
> policies, and .theory more appropriate for discussions of auctions in
> general.
Yes, that's probably true. Replace "theory" with "services" in the above.
> > In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Frank Filz writes:
>
> > > NOOOOOOO (especially NOOOOOOOOOOOOO on combining the auction adds in
> > > with other adds). I really really would like to see announcements for
> > > eBay and BrickLink (and any other high volume site) each in their own
> > > group...
>
> This makes sense, not so much because they are "high volume sites" as
> because such sites have excellent search capabilities (and, in the case of
> BrickLink, wanted list notifications) that make ads for Lego available
> through them a waste of time for most people.
Yeah, but it's still hard to browse. Searching is easy, I agree. But
if you don't have a specific thing in mind, and are susceptible to
impulse buy advertising, then the flogs in .b-s-t or .brickshops or
.auction will make it easy for you to find the good deals. However,
speaking for myself I try to avoid that kind of thing becuase impulse
buying is bad for the pocketbook :-/
> On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Kevin Salm wrote:
>
> > Take away Ebay and BrickLink ads and all other For Sale or Trade
> > postings and there wouldn't be much left.
>
> I'm not seeing the "take away" part here. [...]
What he means is that ebay and bricklink ads and the other FS/T
postings constitute the majority of the messages. It's a figure of
speech.
> > Lugnet has excellent compartmentalization that segregates all
> > market-type stuff to the market groups.
>
> This is not true.
What market-type stuff is found outside the market groups? The only
exception I can think of is lego.announce, which is OK because that's
what it was made for.
> > This provides easy access to these messages but no one is forced to look
> > at them, either. It is not difficult to read Lugnet all day long and
> > not view even one For Sale post--unless you wanted to.
>
> That depends on the day in question. For example, most days I can read
> .castle without seeing any For Sale posts. . .but that's not because
> people can't post them; it's because people in .castle will jump all over
> anyone who does so. It is not clear to me that it's better to tell
> posters "we'll hate you if you post your for-sale stuff here" than to tell
> them "you're in violation of the charter", but the latter isn't an option
> (at least while remaining truthful).
That's how charters work. Compartmentalization only works if the
people posting follow the rules. Blatant disregard for the rules can
result in account revocation and/or having the messages deleted, but
that is rare.
> > Not everyone wants to see all of the For Sale flogs. But they have a
> > purpose and should be allowed to co-exist with other marketplace news.
>
> I disagree. They should be allowed to exist, but I see no reason why they
> should be allowed to co-exist with other marketplace news. I think the
> posts in .technic.roboriders should be allowed to exist, but not that
> they should be allowed to coexist with the posts in .starwars, because I
> go to .starwars to read about Star Wars.
I'm with you - separate 'em. I'm somewhat interested in people's
private buy/sell/trade offers, but brickshop ads are of little
interest to me. If I want to buy from bricklink I'll search for the
parts I want. Impulse buying doesn't make much economic sense, so I
try not to do it.
> This is why I stopped reading .market.brickshops. I'd be more than happy
> to keep up with issues involving BrickLink and other brickshops, but that
> content was being lost in a sea of flogs.
I scan it for interesting messages (based on the subject/author), then
mark the rest as read.
--Bill.
--
William R Ward bill@wards.net http://www.wards.net/~bill/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: lugnet.market.mess
|
| (...) Yea, I guess browsing is harder. It's easier with eBay (though perversely, not so easy with German eBay, with US eBay when you look at all LEGO auctions, they are or can be sorted by start date, in German eBay, they are only sorted by ending (...) (23 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: lugnet.market.mess
|
| (...) It would be nice to implement this for all groups that do not explicitly opt for ads. . . (...) Huh? Why make .theory a subgroup of .ads? There's no reason for ads to be posted to theory, except for illustrative purposes. Also, I'd imagine (...) (23 years ago, 20-Apr-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
20 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
|
|
|
|
