| |
I would think as a minimum we'd need:
dear-lego.bulk (requests to add a part to the service)
dear-lego.rant
dear-lego.sets (discuss what sets to rerelease, if that is ever a possibility -
by
rerelease, I mean the original set OR a remake like Metro/Retrostation)
dear-lego.legodirect (suggestions/improvement to, questions about Lego Direct)
Todd Lehman wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Thomas Main writes:
> > Lorbaat wrote:
> > > Until now, lugnet.dear-lego has been used as (to quote someone else)
> > > essentially a "Dear Santa" group. No doubt there will still be times that
> > > somone wants to say (scream, whine, throw) something at TLC without really
> > > expecting a response, or feeling that it really needs the attention of
> > > someone at Lego Direct.
>
> Like for kvetching or a whinging/whining? :-)
>
> > > If the charter of lugnet.dear-lego changes to being the
> > > channel in which people are trying to communicate directly with Lego, then
> > > they're deprived of a place to do it (which is not, of course, to say that
> > > Brad et al. won't *read* lugnet.dear-lego, just that people posting there
> > > aren't *necessarily* expecting a response or to be taken 100% seriously).
> >
> > I agree totally :)
>
> Hmm, sticky point.
>
> > > If a new hierarchy is created, however, it leaves us with lugnet.dear-lego
> > > for the purposes of railing away at the heavens or babbling about things
> > > we don't expect to really see ("...but a James Bond theme would be so
> > > cool!") without having to burden the good folks at Lego Direct with it.
> > > And on top of that, it gives a fresh start to a new group where
> > > (semi-)serious communication with Lego can begin.
> >
> > I think a new group is certainly warranted for this occasion. It would
> > indeed allow a "fresh start" and open a serious channel of communication.
> > I would sugegst a brand-new group too.
>
> If Brad has no objections and could suggest a couple (or more, if he wants)
> sub-group topic areas that he and/or his colleagues would find most helpful,
> I'm all for turning it into a hierarchy and creating a new group, rather than
> purely repurposing the existing group.
>
> Can we think of some topical sub-groups of .dear-lego that we would like to
> see? I think somebody mentioned a "top 10" wish-list...if it wasn't a joke,
> then I'll bet at least 3 of those are common enough wishes to warrant whole
> separate groups for each. I'm thinking of bulk purchases, for one. IIRC,
> when Jeroen Ottens posted in February, that generated something like 400
> messages across 2-3 threads, and most of that ended up being about bulk
> purchases as a wish-list item. The AU/NZ inventory-scrapping thing a couple
> months ago was another big deal.
>
> Really, wow, though, it could conceivably expand to just about any number of
> groups since there are so many things to talk about. Depends I guess on how
> "deep" LD wants to get into things......
>
> --Todd
--
| Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp
| Please do not associate my personal views with my employer
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
