Subject:
|
RE: .org.au.*
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.loc.au
|
Date:
|
Fri, 2 Jun 2000 04:36:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
472 times
|
| |
|
|
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Callaway [mailto:pcallaway@bmcl.com.au]
> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 2:09 PM
> To: lugnet.loc.au@lugnet.com
> Subject: Re: .org.au.*
>
>
> In lugnet.loc.au, Peter White writes:
> > In lugnet.loc.au, Todd Lehman writes:
> > > In lugnet.loc.au, Todd Lehman writes:
> > > > [...]
> > > > On the other hand, if you guys/gals do now have an • official "club" or user
> > > > group for Australias, then let's go ahead and set up a • lugnet.org.au (or
> > > > lugnet.org.au.legoz or whatever you decide) and then you • can set rules and
> > > > guidelines for _that_ newsgroup because it would be a community-
> > > > created/grown newsgroup set up to serve a specific target • of people (i.e.,
> > > > your club).
> > > >
> > > > Inside of your specific club newsgroup (also • automatically a mailing list),
> > > > you can specially tailor whatever rules you want, so long • as they don't
> > > > (obviously) do anything illegal or get LUGNET in trouble.
> > >
> > > Well, according to EricK's latest map of the Australia/Oceana area,
> > >
> > > http://www.lugnet.com/map/ao/lug/
> > >
> > > There are actually two groups now for Australias -- LegOz and Studs.
> > >
> > > If you wanted newsgroups/mailing-lists for these in the lugnet.org.*
> > > hierarchy of groups, here's how they'd look to fit in:
> > >
> > > lugnet.org.au.legoz <===> lugnet.org.au.legoz@lugnet.com
> > > lugnet.org.au.studs <===> lugnet.org.au.studs@lugnet.com
> > >
> > > Is this something you would like? If so, please have an • official from either
> > > or both of LegOz and Studs contact me and I'll set up the • groups/lists.
> > >
> > > Additionally (or perhaps instead of) would you prefer a single group
> > >
> > > lugnet.org.au <===> lugnet.org.au@lugnet.com
> > >
> > > to cover both LegOz and Studs?
> > >
> > > Lemme know if you want 0, 1, 2, or all 3 groups...
> > >
> > > And also lemme know if you'll allow auction • announcements/updates in the
> > > LegOz/Studs-specific groups.
> >
> > Hi Todd,
> > LegOz and STUDS are one and the same at the moment.
> > We're having more problems than the TORAL's when it comes to • what we're called
> > We're hoping other people in other capitals will get • togethera and form groups
> > hopefully under the LegOz (or whatever it will be called banner).
> >
> > I won't appoint myself as spokesthing for the group, just • express a personal
> > opinion and let others add and subtract from it.
> >
> > We have trouble here with a thin spread of message over too • may groups.
> > People will post and then give up, due to little response in • their local
> > group. Mark.H did not even realise there was a loc.au group • (it all depends
> > how you access Lugnet, if only certain groups are emailed, • people may as well
> > live in Oblivia (;)) As pete.c said maybe we need only one • group per state,
> > loc.au and one .org group.
>
> OK, time for a different approach. Feel free to flame/praise
> me as you see fit.
>
> At the very least we need to keep the following groups;
> lugnet.loc.au.act lugnet.loc.au.nsw lugnet.loc.au.nt lugnet.loc.au.qld
> lugnet.loc.au.sa lugnet.loc.au.tas lugnet.loc.au.vic lugnet.loc.au.wa
>
> Possibly we should also keep the following groups as there is
> activity in
> them, and/or they further breaks down the states and
> territories (since some
> of them are lare areas);
> lugnet.loc.au.act.can lugnet.loc.au.sw.syd lugnet.loc.au.nt.dar
> lugnet.loc.au.qld.bri lugnet.loc.au.sa.ade lugnet.loc.au.vic.mel
> lugnet.loc.au.wa.per
I think that lugnet.loc.au.act.can can be removed, at the least as that is a
major component of the ACT. Personally, I can't see why we need a group for
each capital...In most cases the reason for all the posts in them was that
you couldn't [at least by email] post in the state groups, so the capitals
was where you were forced to post [an unfortunate oversight?]
> We should close off the following groups and divert the
> current messages to
> the next available group in the tree;
> lugnet.loc.au.nsw.new lugnet.loc.au.nt.als lugnet.loc.au.qld.bun
> lugnet.loc.au.qld.cai lugnet.loc.au.qld.goc lugnet.loc.au.qld.mac
> lugnet.loc.au.qld.mis lugnet.loc.au.qld.roc lugnet.loc.au.qld.too
> lugnet.loc.au.qld.tow lugnet.loc.au.tas.hob lugnet.loc.au.wa.alb
> lugnet.loc.au.wa.bun lugnet.loc.au.wa.ger lugnet.loc.au.wa.hed
> lugnet.loc.au.wa.kal
Agreed.
> If anyone feels left out by this then additional groups could be
> created/reinstated, however maintenance of subgroups from the
> state/territory
> groups should be on a volume of traffic basis. If a group
> just sits there not
> being used at all (as many of the above groups have) then it
> is obviously not
> required.
agreed, although .nt should stay. I still feel that a breakdown to
state/territory level should be enough, and that a group for each capital
isn't required.
> We should create the following new groups and allow posting
> of all auction and
> market information in them, along with organisationally
> relevant information;
> lugnet.org.au - which covers LegOz (all of Australia,
> eventually we hope)
> lugnet.org.au.studs - which covers the NSW group Studs
I don't know about the .studs, but .au sounds like a good idea. By creating
a .studs, new lugnetters from aus are going to see it and wonder why there
is only a sydney group. It would be better to have just one group, and to
prefix subjects for studs with 'studs' or similar to designate that you are
referring to that group. Otherwise it'll end up with as many groups in
.org.au as we have in .loc.au
> I don't think we need lugnet.org.au.nsw.studs as that is getting too
> compartmentalised (which can be a bad thing from time to time).
Agreed
>
> Although it has been dealt with in no uncertain terms (and
> I'll probably get a
> smack on the bottom for mentioning it again) I still think
> the most obvious
> place for market/sales/auction information pertinent to
> Australia is in
> loc.au. Call me stuborn, fundamentally inflexible, whatever,
> but that's just
> the way I see it. But since Peter Callaway <> Lugnet sysadmin
> I guess that's
> that. Just don't be surprised if I inadvertently get myself
> pulled over by the
> Lugnet police to be issued a T&C infringement notice if in my
> enthusiasm to
> post something I forget where it is meant to go.
I'll probably end up joining you...I just hope we don't end up in lugnet
jail...1 of our .au members there is enough. [Mark, where trying to break
you out]
> Anyway, </rant> and all that, let's canvas the loc.au
> population and see if we
> can agree to/refine my suggestions above and put this whole
> messy thing behind
> us.
Thought: If todd says that the only place for auctions is .market.auction,
and he won't allow a .au.market or similar, how about a .market.au or a
.market.auction.au?
>
> Pete Callaway (it's been a looooooooooooooong week)
I Agreeeeeeeeeeee.........
Benjamin Whytcross
BWhytcro@PacificAccess.com.au
Ph: (03) 9856 5282
Directory Technology Pty Ltd
1/436 Elgar Road,
Box Hill, 3128
Growing older is compulsory..Growing up isn't :-)
|
|
1 Message in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
