Subject:
|
Re: Should RTL be hosted on this server?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 29 Nov 1998 17:09:24 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
lpien@AVOIDSPAMctp.iwantnospam.com
|
Viewed:
|
2797 times
|
| |
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote:
>
> Here are a few comments that stand out in my mind -- things that get to
> the heart of the matter on a social level. I'd like to hear more opinions
> on these points...
Here goes, but I'd like to hear some response from you on whether you
agree with my technical comments (about article expiration and content
based verification, specifically) or not. :-)
Note that due to size I am putting footnotes on the same page, as it
were...
Note also that I have been reading _The Transparent Society_ by David
Brin, which has influenced my thinking on this quite a bit. While
overtly it's a book about privacy, it deals with community mores, and
the opposing notions of frailty vs. maturity as models for deciding
about content regulation and propagation. Highly recommended. Brin
writes good SF too. But I digress.
>
> Robert M. Dye:
> > [...] I really do enjoy the high percentage of USEFUL posts on
> > LUGNET as compared to RTL. [...]
>
> This seems to be a recurring theme lately, spoken in slightly different
> ways by many different people...
>
> While it's nice to hear on one level (the system was in fact designed to
> have a high percentage of useful posts and to be organized), it hurts on on
> another level each time someone expresses the sentiment. The news system
> here wasn't designed to be compared to RTL, or to be thought of as more
> sophisticated or better in any way, but rather to augment RTL, or, more
> largely, to expand the online community of LEGO fans, which happens to
> include RTL.
An aspect of RTL (and any other newsgroup, for that matter, except
binarys and source groups) is to foster conversation and interchange. An
aspect of LUGNET, no matter what the underlying technology (1) is to
foster conversation and interchange. Therefore the comparision is
inevitable. Rather than being distressed at the comparision, you should
be proud that in only 60 days you were able to significantly improve
things for those fans worthy of LUGNET membership (2).
1 - and that begs a question. Assume RTL is hosted here. In LUGNET v 6.3
when the newsserver technology underneath is no longer visible and
conversation threads are richly textured with non textual content, cross
linked with set databases and poster information and parts lists and
building instructions and cookbooks and pricing information and commerce
and user monetary account information, whither RTL? Will you have to
somehow transmogrify text only appends coming in into something richer
to fit the matrix?
2 - that's right. Worthy. There, I said it. My position here is elitist.
I actively recruit for LUGNET, more below. But only among those that I
feel are mature enough. IN another post, Ed Boxer praised the
"moderation" of this service, but Todd rightly pointed out that these
fora are unmoderated in the technical sense. But the barrier to entry
and stronger community help keep things focused better.
> I'm concerned -- and Rob, I'm not pointing any fingers because I think in
> retrospect that it's 100% natural to want to compare things, and I'm not
> singling you out -- I'm concerned about the way it all boils down in
> people's minds. This isn't to suggest that people are thinking wrong or
> anything, but that the somewhat disturbing (to me, at least) result may
> be indicative of a larger societal problem circling overhead.
>
> Is it possible ever that, as beliefs build that lugnet groups are more
> serious or on-topic than RTL, that there will become an increased
> segregation over time?
Yes, and this is something I fervently want, and my read of many other
opinions here is that others want it too. However I acknowledge the
classic possible trap of reading into the statements of others what I
want to read, because twisting them supports me. Maybe I did... dunno.
>
> Does there exist the possibility someday for a flame war on RTL over which
> venue is "better"? (Certainly, opinions differ; do they differ enough to
> begin driving a wedge?)
Yes. But what of it? LUGNET is now better for societal reasons, and will
soon be better for technical reasons. You might as well debate whether a
telephone is better than a telegraph. Most would agree it is. However
the telegraph still has its place.
> The highest and most important goal and mission of LUGNET is to aggregate
> community rather than to segregate it.
I missed this read before. I disagree. I thought the goal was to enhance
and enrich the experience for those that chose to participate. I reject
the use of the word "segregate" because it has memes that are bad. I
prefer to organize my affairs so that I do not associate with those that
behave in destructive ways. That is not segregation, because anyone who
wishes to behave constructively can join the community. No one is
excluded because of their beliefs or personal attributes, only because
of destructive behaviors.
RTL is a hotbed of destructive behaviours. Leave it there, unattached.
Forcibly assimilating it, as it were, would contaminate LUGNET with bad
behaviour, since people WILL behave badly. Leave them somewhere to do
so. (3)
3 - see _Coventry_, a classic story by Robert A. Heinlein...
> So, the big question is, can the larger online community of LEGO fans
> remain aggregated without RTL being hosted here, or must RTL be hosted
> here in order to prevent further segregation?
>
> It's not an access issue, but a social and perception issue. If RTL is
> hosted here, do people begin to think of RTL as being a sub-community
> under the (conceptually) larger LUGNET umbrella, or do people think of
> the two as being separate and one of them possibly being elitist?
I see it the other way round. LUGNET is a gated enclave in the
wilderness of the internet. As such it has additional rules and
benefits. RTL is a marked out area in the wilderness, but an open range,
not a ranch or farm. No special rules apply other than those enforced by
peer pressure. (and those, rather poorly of late)
The purpose of a gated enclave is to maintain order. Those that choose
to observe the rules and freely reside behind the gates should not have
to try to bring order to the lawless, who do not wish that order anyway.
That is not exclusionary. Now, the great outside is certainly a fertile
ground for recruitment. And it may be a fun place to venture, as long as
you know you might get hurt out there and have no recourse.
> Dave Jost:
> > [...] Could this R.T.L. on Lugnet Thing cause crosscontamination and
> > these thing start happening to Lugnet?
> But back to the word "crosscontamination." Do people view the lugnet
> newsgroups as being more clean or pure -- less contaminated? Is there
> such a huge difference that labels like "contamination" come readily to
> mind for most people? If yes, what is the impact of such labels on the
> larger community of LEGO fans online?
Anyone who wishes to join LUGNET may do so and be a valuable contributor
as long as they remain civilized. So I see the impact as positive.
> > [...]
> > Unless this togetherness is an improvement do not change a thing.
>
> That's the big question: Is more togetherness a step forward or a step
> backward? And is bringing RTL to the newsserver here actually more
> togetherness or is it the same level of togetherness?
I see it as a step backward as I outlined above.
> Simon said:
> > There would also be a community in RTL for newbies to join, if all th
> > good people move here, then 'recruitment' would be almost zero, no-one
> > would become involved and so the amount of LEGO InterNet people would
> > decrease.
>
> I'm interested in hearing more about this 'recruitment' -- can you give some
> examples of how people have recruited others in the past.
I get notes all the time from people who have stumbled across my web
site (4) or across my posts on RTL but are lurkers.
I have a semi canned reply (which I should formally can, since I now
recreate it from scratch each time, sigh. No time to save time...)
pointing them to RTL, and to the various sources of information. If I
deem them worthy, I point them here. That's right. I make a value
judgement based on what I perceive of them in their notes to me.
People post to RTL about LUGNET all the time too, and several people
have stuff in their sigs touting LUGNET. Here's Mike Stanley's: (quoted
without permission)
> www.lugnet.com/news/ - A great new resource for LEGO fans worldwide
I could swear that in at least one case a direct comparision is made,
but I could not find it in a quick search.
To reiterate, my position is elitist. I am a supporter of meritocracy. I
find LUGNET an improvement over RTL and do not wish the vast unwashed to
gain admittance here, nor do I wish to undertake the essentially futile
mission of trying to reform RTL. I prefer RTL separate so I can go
slumming once in a while. :-)
4 - in some amazing ways, actually... today I got one from an employee
of a client who heard about me from a CTPer... I don't know the CTPer in
question or anything about the client either.
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Should RTL be hosted on this server?
|
| (...) You may be 100% right, before I tackle any of those questions, I need to come to a better understanding of section 202 of the new Digital Millenium Copyright Act of the 105th Congress. It deals with limitations on liabilities for Internet (...) (26 years ago, 29-Nov-98, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Should RTL be hosted on this server?
|
| Here are a few comments that stand out in my mind -- things that get to the heart of the matter on a social level. I'd like to hear more opinions on these points... Robert M. Dye: (...) This seems to be a recurring theme lately, spoken in slightly (...) (26 years ago, 29-Nov-98, to lugnet.general)
|
132 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
|
|
|
|
