Subject:
|
Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego.direct
|
Date:
|
Mon, 19 Mar 2001 02:06:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1610 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.lego.direct, Jake McKee writes:
> > I for one would be interested to hear the details on this... neither Tomas
> > or I are really sure what happened to cause this change.
>
> Nothing really in particular. Yesterday's events were certainly a catalyst,
> however.
>
> > Basically, I think that all of the AFOLs at LEGO Direct are looking for a
> > little more background on this move, as it sounds like several of the
> > community members are as well.
>
> http://news.lugnet.com/lego/direct/?n=2185
> http://news.lugnet.com/lego/direct/?n=2189
> http://news.lugnet.com/lego/direct/?n=2201
> http://news.lugnet.com/admin/nntp/?n=414
> http://news.lugnet.com/admin/nntp/?n=436
Todd,
I think the move to put some "bounds" on messages from TLC personnel
was a Good Thing. Particularly in light of some of the less than
rosy incidents that have occurred between TLC and LUGNET in the
past[1]. You are right that TLC is a company and the things they
do are for business purposes, not primarily the benefit of us fans
here on LUGNET.
It does not particularly matter to me whether TLC has a presence
on LUGNET or not. LUGNET can get by just fine without them.
Likewise TLC can get by just fine without us. However I still
believe there are obvious (or not so obvious?) benefits to both
groups that TLC personnel do participate on LUGNET. I won't
go into those as they are discussed ad infinitum here.
I feel that a clear distinction does need to be made between
TLC personnel posting on behalf of TLC, and those posting simply
as AFOLs. That distinction has long stood in LUGNET's T&Cs,
specifically regarding the signature to be used by TLC employees.
The current issue has become what areas of LUGNET should be
open to "official TLC employee posts". I for one agree that
such posts should be restricted to the lugnet.lego heirarchy
(or something similar). That way everyone knows where to find
such official information, and additionally everyone can be
confident that the information is legitimate (and please, nobody
re-start the thread that proved false messages can be posted!).
What I find unfortunate is the current solution of restricting
*every* post from a lego.com address in this manner. My *only*
reason for protesting this is that I feel there are AFOLs who
just happen to be TLC employees, who may simply want to interact
with other AFOLs in a non-official way. I don't believe they
should be hard-code barred from participating in the LUGNET groups
with the rest of us. All of us here abide by various "honour codes"
regarding how to participate appropriately on LUGNET. Well, it's
not just an honour code, there's the T&Cs, but very rarely are
those "invoked" upon someone. For the most part we moderate ourselves
to follow the general spirit of the rules around here.
I do not understand why TLC employees can not be afforded the
same accountability for their own actions. To me, it is very
easy to make a distinction between an offical TLC business post,
and a simple AFOL post from a TLC employee: is the information
contained in the post "privileged", i.e., only an employee of
TLC would have access to that information? If so, then it's
a "business post", and the poster is representing TLC. The
post should be placed into the appropriate group. Otherwise,
the post is "personal" and can go wherever appropriate for
the topic.
I would prefer a system like this rather than one that hard-code
prevents genuine AFOLs, who happen to be TLC employees, from
participating in LUGNET with the rest of us. The T&C could
reflect this policy. Additionally, a check-box could be added to
the LUGNET new member registration process that will "flag" people
who are TLC employees. They would then be advised of unique T&Cs
specific to them, that don't apply to the rest of us. If you witness
any abuse, corporate or otherwise, then you can act as appropriate.
To the other LUGNETers who worry that restricting official TLC
posts to certain groups may mean they'll never see them, I offer
this idea: How about a LUGNET feature that searches for posts
from lego.com addresses in the official .lego heirarchy, and
shows the most recent ones at www.lugnet.com. This would be
analagous to the "Top Stories" list. The filter for lego.com
addresses is so it only flags posts from TLC. Of course this
list would only be seen by web users, but at least it's
something. Also, this would work regardless of any posting
filters you may implement in the .lego groups as suggested
here: http://news.lugnet.com/admin/nntp/?n=317
Anyhow those are my thoughts on your recent action. A
well-warranted policy change, but perhaps there is a different
way to achieve the same end?
[1] Such as the message censoring legal order. Not that I believe in
any way that your recent move is any kind of retaliation.
Thanx,
KDJ
_______________________________________
LUGNETer #203, Windsor, Ontario, Canada
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
| (...) Nothing really in particular. Yesterday's events were certainly a catalyst, however. (...) I filled out the news-posting setup form... (URL) for each of my email addresses, and then I change the setup in my newsreader (and then back again) if (...) (23 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
232 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
|
|
|
|
