 | | Lugnet's great signal to noise ratio
|
|
I read 13 groups on Lugnet, and rarely download more than 40 articles in any given day. I routinely get 80-120 messages from RTL, mostly mindstorms, flamewars, and off-topic computer-geekese. Here on Lugnet I get so little of that, it's great. But a (...) (26 years ago, 12-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet's great signal to noise ratio
|
|
(...) I'd say things are slowly picking up, but it is taking a while for people to come over. I'm not sure it would be possible to cross-post articles from a Lugnet group to RTL, although I'm sure if I'm wrong 3 people will point it out before I get (...) (26 years ago, 12-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet's great signal to noise ratio
|
|
Jesse Long wrote in message ... (...) any (...) to (...) very (...) I am the same... 15 groups, and very manageable number of articles. I figure I will cut out some in a month or so... see where the off-topic groups go? *My* answer to your question: (...) (26 years ago, 12-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet's great signal to noise ratio
|
|
(...) IMO, the reduced number of posts is due to fewer people currently accessing, compared to RTL. Keep in mind that these groups have only really been running publicly for 7 1/2 days, and that things will ramp up slowly. Three to six months from (...) (26 years ago, 12-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet's great signal to noise ratio
|
|
(...) The lack of propagation delays is one reason why I think people will be more likely to post here once they show up. Right now it might take days for people to see my posts, and sometimes it almost seems like a waste of time, especially for the (...) (26 years ago, 12-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet's great signal to noise ratio
|
|
(...) I think the REAL benefit of LUGNET will the the ability to see Mike Stanley's posts almost instantly. Admittedly, we'll miss the sense of anticipation, as in, "I wonder which of Mike Stanley's posts will show up next." However, I think Mike (...) (26 years ago, 12-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet's great signal to noise ratio
|
|
(...) Whahahaha, good one. Like people sit around wondering what gibberish I'll post next. :) (...) Cool, glad to hear it. :) (26 years ago, 12-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet's great signal to noise ratio
|
|
(...) That's almost exactly what happened to me too! Sarah Heacock sarah@eskimo.com (26 years ago, 15-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet's great signal to noise ratio
|
|
(...) "for the people by the people" does NOT necessarily mean "you suck, no you suck, not you suck more" and I think that LugNET news server points this out quite clearly. Mr. Lehman is quite open to comments from everyone -- and he even listens (...) (26 years ago, 15-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet's great signal to noise ratio
|
|
(...) *smile* Just keep thinking that way. Sarah Heacock sarah@eskimo.com (26 years ago, 15-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet's great signal to noise ratio
|
|
(...) See? I can always count on Sarah to keep me honest. :) (26 years ago, 15-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet's great signal to noise ratio
|
|
(...) The people at work say the exact same thing. I don't understand why... Sarah (26 years ago, 15-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet's great signal to noise ratio
|
|
Perhaps a Princess.... wrote in message (...) I agree completely. What I was trying to say was, the *opportunity* to make such posts, with no recourse, exits within the Usenet. Not that Usenet or "for the people by the people"-systems are defined (...) (26 years ago, 16-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
