| |
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Edward Welsh wrote:
> A few thoughts, anyway, that I'd love to pursue further. Interest?
> Administrative support?
>
>
> -Teddy
Wow, controversy on LUGNET. Will wonders never cease? ;] Damn I'm going
to regret this. Oh well, as long as my post is more coherent than JAL's,
I've done good. ;]
I have formed a theory. Here's a pictorial representation of part of my
theory:
LUGNET
.
.
LUGNET.Castle, LUGNET.Space...
.
.
LUGNET.Kyle
Now you've got to ask, WTF (pardon my french) is "LUGNET.Kyle"?! What in
heck does it have to do with LEGO?! Well, the charter would read: "A group
for discussing the LEGO creations, collections, activities, etc., of
Kyle, and of devout worshippers of the style of Kyle, and such and such." :]
The top of the heap is "LUGNET", which contains everything. The bottom of
the heap, "LUGNET.Kyle" is, I believe, as individually-tailored of a group
as possible. "LUGNET" includes *everyone*. "LUGNET.Kyle", for the most
part, *excludes* everyone.
So one would assume there is no purpose for "LUGNET.Kyle" to exist on LUGNET,
a website for *uniting* LEGO enthusiasts, not dividing them.
But in between the two extremes of "LUGNET" and "LUGNET.Kyle", there is a
large gray-dient. You can create subdivisions like .Castle and .Space, and
the people will go "OOooo!" and there will be much rejoicing, because these
subdivisions are clearly LEGO-specific. But when you start creating
subdivisions like .off-topic.whatever, a few people start going "I dunnooo...",
because things are not so clearly LEGO-specific anymore. (I was around for
the creation of some of those, and I remember the debates...) But these groups
still get created with generally little fanfare, because only a few people
have really strong opinions about the content.
Now, come out with the suggestion for something specific to the so-called
"alternative lifestyles", an very emotionally-charged topic for pretty
much anyone regardless of their opinions of the issues, and you are guaranteed
to get protracted, heated, debate. Having read the contents of *all* of
this debate since it started a few days ago, I *could* make the following
conclusion about LUGNET:
(most *in*clusive)
LUGNET
.
.
LUGNET.Castle, LUGNET.Space...
.
.
LUGNET.off-topic.whatever, LUGNET.people...
.
_________________________
LUGNET.Lavender
.
.
LUGNET.Kyle
(most *ex*clusive)
See that line there? One *could* conclude that line is "The Line", as
in "You just crossed The Line, you've gone into an area that LUGNET
shouldn't go." Shame, shame. :] That is certainly the impression that
all the dicsussion leaves one with.
But..., some folks point out those items just above the line, and say, "If
we have these, then what's wrong with adding that thing just below the
line? What's the difference?" And I feel they're right, there is little
difference. For conistency of policy, and general fairness, if you allow
those items just above that line, you have to allow those just below the
line, too.
But then where do you stop? "LUGNET.Kyle" is coming right after it... The
answer is, you don't stop, because that's the policy.
Personally, my view of LUGNET is this:
(most *in*clusive)
LUGNET
.
.
LUGNET.Castle, LUGNET.Space...
______________________________
.
LUGNET.off-topic.whatever, LUGNET.people...
.
.
LUGNET.Lavender
.
.
LUGNET.Kyle
(most *ex*clusive)
See where the line is now? This is my point for starting this post: I think
LUGNET crossed a line a looooong time ago, and that was the non-LEGO-specific
subdivisions. Now I'm not saying it was a bad line for LUGNET's founders
to cross. But it established a fundamental policy/vision for LUGNET that
has influenced the "course" of LUGNET ever since. LUGNET crossed from a
purely interactive Internet *resource* for LEGO enthusiasts, to an attempt
to be a virtual "community" for LEGO enthusiasts. (Personally, I don't
believe at all in the concept of an on-line community. I firmly believe
there can be no such thing. How can a pile of text form a community?
Anyhow, that's discussion for another day...)
So my point is that while a specific proposal for LUGNET expansion, such
as this one, may generate a lot of opposition (for better or worse), that
does not mean that it's just because of this specific proposal. I believe
*most* people aren't rearing up in opposition to LUGNET.Lavender because
it happens to be Lavender. I think it's just that it's an emotionally
charged enough issue, where most anyone has an opinion, that it has gotten
a lot of attention. It's not because Lavender itself would make LUGNET
cross any specific Line..., it's because people haven't realized that
LUGNET *already* crossed a line a looooong time ago.
So for everyone who disagrees with the existence of LUGNET.Lavender, or
any previous group that may have crossed the Line, I have this suggestion:
Vote with your wallets/participation. It would be interesting to tally up
all of the bandwidth required by LUGNET for non-LEGO-specific traffic, and
compare it to the total. (For sure all the drivvle in rtlToronto is a
quarter of it! ;] ) Now think of your membership fee and donations
to LUGNET. A percentage of that is going to support those non-LEGO-specific
activities. How does that make you feel? Is that what you expected when
you sent in the money?
I'm certainly not advocating a revolt or mass exodus away from LUGNET. But
rather that people really think about what they want from LUGNET, what
they can reasonably "expect" from LUGNET, etc. Then look at what LUGNET is
providing you and ask if it satisfies you. If not, if you think it has
crossed some kind of Line that you disagree with, then maybe you should
consider working with others to create an Internet resource for LEGO
enthusiasts that support your preferred vision. Personally, I don't entirely
agree with LUGNET's course, and it has nothing to do with the posssibility
of .Lavender. It has to do with the whole concept of LUGNET being labelled
as a "community", an assertion that I find to be absurd..., okay, again,
not going there! ;] Because of this I largely dropped out of the newsgroups
and use LUGNET more to fulfull what I need of it: I use it as a resource.
A neat thing with the Internet is if you don't like what is happening in
an area you frequent, you can always move to another, or even start your
own venture. I anxiously await to see if anyone takes the latter approach...,
you may find there are a lot of LUGNET users interested in joining/helping
you.
Play well :]
KDJ
P.S. to all "pro-Lavenderians", I recognize that the proposal was to maintain
some LEGO-relevancy via "Lavender-themed MOCs", etc. So above when I refer
to Non-LEGO-specific subdivisions, I mean the reason for the subdivision is
non-LEGO-specific, not necessarily that the content of discussion is not
related to LEGO.
______________________________
LUGNETer #203, Ontario, Canada
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Is LUGNET what you really want? (Was: Re: Lavender Brick Society)
|
| In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Kyle D. Jackson wrote: <snip> (...) No, what I expected when I joined LUGNET, was part resource, part discussion. .space mostly. I saw it as a place to exchange building ideas and maybe a little banter. But what I got (...) (20 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.fun.community, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.people, lugnet.org)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Lavender Brick Society
|
| I've been kicking an idea around for a while, and I wanted to put it out to the community: I'd like to start an organization for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) AFOLs. A lavender brick society, if you like. It's seemed to me that (...) (20 years ago, 14-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.fun.community, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.people, lugnet.org) !!
|
207 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
