Subject:
|
Re: New group...moving forward?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.jambalaya
|
Date:
|
Mon, 19 Jul 1999 23:41:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
843 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.market.jambalaya, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> > How will this be managed?
Anarchy, I suppose, unless/until someone wants to orchestrate things in a
more coherent manner. Certainly the newsgroup could be used for coming up
with rules and regulations, etc., as well as regular talk about what sorts
of things people would like to give/take.
> > Is anyone considering 'rules' for participation? What needs to be
> > figured out?
> >
> > How much of the box can I keep when it arrives?
Going back to my original post, I was thinking that you could actually keep
*all* of a box if everything in it actually happened to appeal to you -- but
only so long as you replaced everything you took out with things of equal or
better condition and rough size. Like, don't go and take out only 10
pristine windows and put back in 20 slobbery dog-chewed 2x4 bricks in their
place. :) Or don't go and take out 5 castle minifigs and put back 5 itty
bitty 1x1 plates.
> > How much should I put back in?
I dunno if it'll be easy to nail that down. That's probably the biggest
challenge. Generally, the idea is (as someone said) always to keep a good
mix going. Maybe if you take out a lot and don't have much to put back,
you might need to go buy a small set or two at the store to fill the mix
back up.
> > Where do I send it when I'm done?
To anyone else who is ready to receive, I guess. On the one hand, you could
queue people up, but on the other hand, with some kind of smart scheduling
software (which I'm not offering to write) you could re-route things back to
someone before it was their "turn" again if an optimizer felt it would help
things overall.
> > Will I be signing up to participate in one or all boxes?
Initially, you'd probably be signing up (with someone) just for two
transactions -- from someone to yourself, and then from yourself to someone
else.
It's fine with me if each box has a life of its own and acts autonomously,
finding its own way around the world with human help, but it's also OK with
me if there's some kind of central sign-up system for queueing up people and
organizing requests (but I'm not offering to write that).
> > Will this be centrally managed at all?
> >
> > Should there be an agreement made in order to sign up?
If someone wanted to write a system for that, that would be great. Might
be a good idea to let boxes float around aimlessly for a month or so first,
though, to gather info on the dynamics. (Generally, IMHO, it's almost
always best to do something by hand a few times before automating it.)
> > Is this going to be a group thing, or is it someone's baby?
> >
> > What else?
>
> Any thoughts? Todd, did you have any assumptions about this as the
> idea's originator?
I'd like to "let go" and just see where it all winds up. To me, it's really
a sociological and e-commerce experiment as well as simply a way to unload a
bunch of pieces that are eager to find new homes.
As long as boxes are traveling around, and pieces are being taken out and
being replaced with other pieces, and people are having a good time, then
that's all that really matters to me. If someone (or a group of people)
wants to take the lead and make it all formalized, that's OK too.
Maybe someday, individual have/want lists for parts (part of the LUGNET
plan) could be linked in with this -- but that'd be quite a ways down the
road.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: New group...moving forward?
|
| (...) I ought to clarify that a bit -- I'm not offering to write anything to handle this _yet_. I think later it will all fit in nicely with the rest of the infrastructure. (I just can't make it a priority anytime relatively soon.) Having multiple (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jul-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
| | | Re: New group...moving forward?
|
| (...) I should clarify that bit too -- by "let go" I mean not staying closely involved with the evolving rules and day-to-day interactions. Since it's got so much potential to evolve into many different types of packages and rule-sets, I'd rather (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jul-99, to lugnet.market.jambalaya)
|
Message is in Reply To:
8 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
|
|
|
|
