Subject:
|
To Todd - Could we get .org.au up soon
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.loc.au
|
Date:
|
Tue, 20 Jun 2000 00:25:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
764 times
|
| |
|
|
Todd,
Consider this to be as official or unofficial as you like, as chances are I'll
just cut'n'paste an email to you from this if thats whats required.
Recently the traffic on Lugnet under the loc.au groups have indicated that
there's a significant community of Lego fans in Australia. We do not quite
have the numbers of some of the other organisations that have been formed, and
this combined with the tyranny of distance has meant that there has been no
truely "national" event or organisation formed yet.
However there has been activity amongst lego fans who live relatively close to
each other. The STUDS events are an example of such.
The other matter that has been raised regarding the Australian group(s) has
been that of trading notices. As per Lugnet terms and conditions we have to
our best endevours kept trading out of the loc.au group(s).
What we request is that loc.au.org group be formed.
At present it will represent a collective of all lego fans from Australia who
are regular posters in loc.au but in the future as expansion occurs, it may be
divided into smaller groups such as the STUDS group.
Loc.au.org will be used for discussion regarding group activities, meetings
and events that are held by any Lego group within Australia (and not just
confined to any one particular group at present). We would also like to use it
for notifying other Australian members about any trading opportunites amongst
ourselves.
If you feel that such a group is not structured enough (as in there are no
clear definition of what the organisation is), then let me know. We may have
to let STUDS "adopt" a national organisation in which the group will remain as
loc.au.org, but will be reprsented by STUDS until other groups are associated.
At present there is no need to for there to be distinction between
loc.au.org.studs and loc.au.org.legoz, as there would not be enough traffic to
justify either of these hence one single Australian organisation group would
be preferred.
Could you please let us know how this proposal sounds, if it's acceptable:
what are the next steps to take, if there are problems: what do we need to
straighten out?
Regards
Santosh
In lugnet.loc.au, Richard Parsons writes:
> "James Howse" wrote a good summary of the ins and outs of the proverbial
> aquatic fowl's digestive system.
>
> I didn't sense any support for .org.au.studs at the recent get together
> either, nor for .org.au.legoz.
>
> .org.au would seem to make sense in terms of meeting the needs other folks
> have expressed hereabouts, but for me personally, the existing .loc.au does
> it all.
>
> Todd has a need for a Studly official to speak and I can understand that,
> and Santosh would seem to me to be the man.
>
> I know Mark has his issues and is lobbying hard outside Lugnet, but to me
> this is all fairly straightforward. Todd's site, Todd's rules. Seems to me
> that within the limits set and agreed we can pretty much achieve all we
> want. Stay far enough outside the rules for long enough and you're out of
> the game. And you're still free to start your own (other) game if you want.
> I just don't have a problem with that. But then, I'm not here for the
> trading - it happens, but sort of by accident and on the side and in email.
> I like it fine that way.
>
> Running Lugnet must be a <<expletive indicating extreme badness deleted>> of
> a job, and it seems to me Todd shows a patience and a community focus that
> goes way beyond the necessary.
>
> Richard
> Still baldly going...
> 934 and closing....
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: To Todd - Could we get .org.au up soon
|
| I think I'll butt in just right now. In lugnet.loc.au, Santosh Bhat writes a good explanation for creating an NG for Oz orgs. (...) Hmm. There was an issue that came up in the "market splitting" dicussion, and I think it is applicable here. If at (...) (24 years ago, 20-Jun-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
| | | Re: To Todd - Could we get .org.au up soon
|
| In lugnet.loc.au, Santosh Bhat writes(badly): (...) No, actually we request a loc.org.au (misteak #1) (...) No,loc.org.au will be used for discussion (misteak #2) (...) Again, the group will remain as loc.org.au (misteak #3) (...) Ditto, (misteak (...) (24 years ago, 20-Jun-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
| | | Re: To Todd - Could we get .org.au up soon
|
| (...) I assume you mean .org.au ? (...) OK, got it. (I assume you mean .org.au, though.) (...) Based on previous discussions, is it correct to assume that this explicitly includes auctions? (...) OK, that's fine. The .loc.us group is similar in that (...) (24 years ago, 20-Jun-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Could we get .org.au up soon
|
| "James Howse" wrote a good summary of the ins and outs of the proverbial aquatic fowl's digestive system. I didn't sense any support for .org.au.studs at the recent get together either, nor for .org.au.legoz. .org.au would seem to make sense in (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jun-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
22 Messages in This Thread:
  
- 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
|
|
|
|
