 | | Re: Meta Question —Richard Franks
|
| | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Adrian Egli wrote: A good question! For certain, RTL did not make a comeback. The theory I've heard is the growth of theme group sites like Classic Space outside of Lugnet have drawn readers away from Lugnet. I always (...) (17 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Meta Question —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | (...) --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 (...) (17 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Meta Question —Richard Franks
|
| | | | (...) 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 (...) (17 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Meta Question —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | (...) 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 (...) (17 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Meta Question —Richard Franks
|
| | | | (...) 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 (...) (17 years ago, 17-Jan-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
