| |
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Kevin Wilson writes:
> Frank Filz wrote in message ...
> > 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). • So
> > if there is too much compartmentalization, I will not read a lot of stuff.
>
> I disagree, I don't feel that LUGNET is over-compartmentalized at this
> point, and I find it easier to add groups I want to read to my newsreader
> and ignore other groups, than to wade through extremely busy groups like
> Castle, which I don't read because most of it is not that interesting to me,
> and which seem to act as a catch-all for several subjects.
Well, .castle certainly is busy, and that may be a good reason to split it.
What I am trying to push though is to make sure we think about the split, and
not just create a new group based on one small (currently) thread.
> > So my question again is do we really need a group to discuss Pern in? Right
> > now, I say no. If a long discussion develops and there seems to be a wide
> > interest in it, and folks feel like it isn't just a side bar discussion, • only
> > then does it need a new group.
>
> It isn't just to discuss Pern, but fantasy subjects generally.
>
> I think the most valid negative so far has been the question of whether
> people who are right now discussing fantasy in Castle would move/copy to
> build.fantasy, or would we end up with discussion in 2 places. I've asked
> people in Castle to comment on this suggestion.
This is a real concern. If a new group is created, and only a few people use
it, and the other intended traffic continues on in the "wrong" place, all we
have succeeded in doing is fragmenting things.
Something to think about is that there are many cases of discussion continuing
in "wrong" places. I think some people either decide for themselves what
belongs where, or are really only interested in following a small handful of
groups.
Certainly there have been many folks complaining that we are already too
compartmentalized.
Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Fantasy group?
|
| Frank Filz wrote in message ... (...) So (...) I disagree, I don't feel that LUGNET is over-compartmentalized at this point, and I find it easier to add groups I want to read to my newsreader and ignore other groups, than to wade through extremely (...) (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
|
|
|
|
