Subject:
|
Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego.direct
|
Date:
|
Fri, 14 Jun 2002 17:36:49 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
!
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
2468 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Jake McKee writes:
> Let me start by saying that I would love to have even more communication
> happen on LUGNET from LEGO. I am meeting with Brad on Monday and plan on
> discussing how to make this possible. While LEGO Direct is up to our ears
> in work, we all feel dedicated to and interested in open communication.
Jake,
I'm glad to hear that. We're very interested in that as well. On the one
hand, we want to keep the groups as pure and fan-to-fan as possible and remain
true to that vision, but on the other hand, we want everyone to enjoy as close
communications with TLC as possible. Those two ideals are, of course, in a
sense mutually exclusive, so it's a big balancing game. I'm really interested
in discovering what the best long-term policies are.
> Most questions of LEGO actually get asked outside of lego.direct. Since I
> can't answer those questions "officially" and I'm not sure what the
> appropriate method of cross linking the answer with the question, I feel
> uncomfortable posting about that issue out of context. I would absolutely
> love if I could, along with other LD employees, post directly to a question
> with a few brief lines to answer a question in context. Unfortunately,
> LUGNET prohibits this.
Here is how you can do that under the current policy of official posts going
to the .lego.direct newsgroup: When you want to post an official reply to a
message, outside of .lego.direct, simply reply as you normally would, but then
change the "Newsgroups:" line so that it says "lugnet.lego.direct" in place of
the original group. Your reply will be chained (threaded) onto the original
message during viewing, but will be officially associated with the .lego.direct
newsgroup.
I'm sorry that cross-posting can be confusing -- I wish it were clearer
sometimes myself.
> Basically, it seems to me that there is less dialogue than there is argument
> in lego.direct. There is also much more assertion – not necessarily fact
> based assertion – than inquiry as well. This is what really gets in the way
> of true open dialogue.
I have to admit, I think you're right about that -- and it's been that way
since the beginning.
At one point last year the noise levels were so high that Brad was having a
very difficult time keeping up with things. Suzanne and I talked about what
we might be able to do to eliminate (or usher elsewhere) this noise, and we
came up with an idea that we kinda liked in theory but didn't ever figure out
how to make practical and understandable. Anyway the idea was that we could
limit replies in .lego.direct to be one of TLC->AFOL, AFOL->TLC, or TLC->TLC,
but not allowing AFOL->AFOL. In other words, an AFOL could post a reply to a
TLC message, and vice-versa, and a TLC employee could post a reply to another
TLC employee, but an AFOL couldn't post a reply to another AFOL in the
.lego.direct area. We liked this idea for the advantages it would bring, but
it had the downside that one AFOL can't add additional information to another
AFOL's post -- which is good if it's noise but bad if it's pertinent info.
Jake, what are your thoughts on that idea? Would it help you and others at
LEGO Direct if AFOL-AFOL replies were limited in the .lego.direct group?
> And of course, being confined to one area of the site, without ability to
> link answers with questions doesn’t help much either.
(see above, about crossposting and linking answers)
> "Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?"
> I think this is somewhat misleading. The way it we have understood it, this
> is really not "our" newsgroup, but rather the group that we have been given
> access to.
I think she just meant it from the standpoint of: in the newsgroup that Brad
asked for (circa April 2000) as an LD communication channel to the community.
> TLC might seem like this huge mega corporation on top of a big hill
> somewhere, but it's not. It's a company made up of people who want nothing
> more than happy consumers. Sure, we don't always get there, but each and
> every one of strives to achieve it.
I know I'm guilty of saying things sometimes that I've regretted later, because
I opened my mouth too quickly or judged something too quickly. You're right,
it's very easy to forget that TLC is made up of people -- good people -- who
want happy consumers. The amount of things that TLC must have to balance is
staggering.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
| (...) How is this any better than having the message appear in the other group? On the web interface, it looks the same - the list of messages in the thread, when viewed from the other group, includes the official LD message. If you allow this type (...) (22 years ago, 14-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
| In lugnet.lego.direct, Suzanne D. Rich writes: Suzanne (and All), Sorry about the delay in responding. I have been swamped this week, and wanted to run a few things past a few people, Brad especially (who is out of the office on a trans-European (...) (22 years ago, 14-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct) !!
|
134 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
|
|
|
|
