| |
In lugnet.dear-lego, admin@lugnet.com (Todd Lehman) writes:
> [...]
> Reformatting lugnet.dear-lego (by retroactively altering its charter) sounds
> like a great idea to me (and to Suzanne). Anyone have any objections to
> that?
>
> I like the idea especially for the following reasons:
>
> 1. If people at Lego Direct are planning to read and participate actively
> in at least one of the groups here, then lugnet.dear-lego is just as
> good as any, IMHO.
>
> 2. If a group named something else were created, then lugnet.dear-lego
> would probably still end up being used a lot of the time anyway by
> people, since it's an inviting name and a top-level group.
>
> 3. Since lugnet.dear-lego is a top-level group, it is perfectly positioned
> for additional subgroups later...if, when, and as appropriate.
>
> 4. Any additional focused subgroups of lugnet.dear-lego created down the
> road would each be subscribeable via e-mail (as mailing lists) just like
> any other lugnet newsgroup, which could be nice for people at Lego
> Direct if the volume of traffic in the main .dear-lego group is high.
How does this sound as a new charter for lugnet.dear-lego:
lugnet.dear-lego: Online communication-to-LEGO channel;
formal dialogues with the LEGO Company; suggestions,
opinions, likes & dislikes, questions, etc.
[Brad, is there anything in the text immediately above which should not be
encouraged (for example, product suggestions)? Or do you intend for LEGO
Direct to go the whole nine yards and become intimiately involved?]
--Todd Lehman
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
