 | | Two
|
|
Perhaps. (19 years ago, 21-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.test)
|
| |
| | One
|
|
I wonder. (19 years ago, 21-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.test)
|
| |
| | One
|
|
I wonder. (19 years ago, 21-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.test)
|
| |
| | test
|
|
(19 years ago, 19-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.test)
|
| |
| | test
|
|
test (URL) end (19 years ago, 18-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.test)
|
| |
| | Re: Meta Question
|
|
(...) Agreed - it also makes good business sense. What is your basis for assuming the former possibility and disregarding the latter? (...) I was responding to "I have my doubts that anyone even could [turn a profit]" - by sourcing all my figures (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Meta Question
|
|
(...) And there I was thinking it might only be for themes lots of people were interested in. (...) Well (URL) MOCpages> breaks even but (URL) CSF> has, until quite recently been run purely out of pocket. I realise that research is a bit slower than (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Meta Question
|
|
(...) That seems to be the consensus. But I don't see any Rock Raiders offshoot sites, which from my external perspective makes it look less about format, and more about cherry-picking... BICBVW! (...) Well, I don't think it's that hard considering (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Meta Question
|
|
(...) --snip-- (...) I'm not exactly sure that anyone has attempted to start a new site 'to make a few bucks'. I have my doubts that anyone even could. I believe the first offshoot sites were started due to disagreements about the running and format (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Meta Question
|
|
Thanks for the detailed recap! (...) I agree (although that's probably a bit off-topic for off-topic.debate) - I have quite an irrational fondness for this little corner of the internet. Richard (19 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
