| |
On Thu, 2 May 2002, Frank Filz wrote:
> Now I suppose the problem of many groups is less for folks who use the
> web interface (where you can totally turn off compartmentalization by
> just reading everything at the top level).
That's odd. . .I was just thinking that adding more groups might be a
problem for Web readers, since that's more clicks to follow each group of
interest. For NNTP it's easy (at least with Pine and, I assume, other
newsreaders): if the group is of interest, add it---the newsreader will
check it for new messages, and not bother you if there are none; if the
group is not of interest, there's that much less noise.
--
TWS Garrison
http://www.math.purdue.edu/~tgarriso/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Fantasy group?
|
| (...) I use Netscape, and at work at least, used to have it only display groups with unread messages. Currently though, my Netscapes are all set up to show all groups (in fact, I don't see a way to tell it to not display groups with no unread (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Fantasy group?
|
| (...) are (...) as (...) I disagree that there is little harm in creating new groups. While I am definitely a compartmentalized dork, I also realize that I will really only look at a limited number of groups (probably about 20 on a regular basis). (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
29 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
|
|
|
|
