| |
In lugnet.admin.general, lehman@javanet.com (Todd Lehman) writes:
> Any opinions on how LUGNET member #'s should be allocated/assigned?
> [...]
Someone just wrote in and asked,
"I just joined/registered with LUGNET, ... why are membership numbers
being proposed?"
This is a good question, and may well be a commonly wondered question at
this point, so I'm posting the answer here and bcc'ing via e-mail the person
who wrote in the question.
The answer is: Because there isn't yet such a thing as LUGNET memberships.
There are users (registered and unregistered) but no members.
The registration (or news-posting setup) process that you see now is simply
a request form for newsgroup-posting privileges. Memberships are something
totally different -- on a whole different level of functionality -- which
will start out simple and grow over time to do zillions of cool things.
Anyone with deep curiousity about some of the details is invited to read the
LUGNET Plan document, which is still fairly accurate and relevant:
http://www.lugnet.com/admin/plan/
So anyway, the newsgroup system here and the website so far represent only
about 10% of what LUGNET will grow to be over the next 3-10 years. When
memberships are added this summer, that will jump to about 20% then of the
whole thing. The Plan document covers things up through about roughly 50%.
--Todd
[crossposted to lugnet.general; followups to lugnet.admin.general]
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Allocation of member #'s
|
| Any opinions on how LUGNET member #'s should be allocated/assigned? Here are some possibilities: - One possibility is simply to start at 1 and count upward on a first- come, first-serve basis, one number at a time. (I think this might be what ICQ (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jul-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.general)
|
112 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
|
|
|
|
