To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.funOpen lugnet.off-topic.fun in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Fun / 10334
10333  |  10335
Subject: 
Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate
Followup-To: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Thu, 24 Apr 2003 05:18:54 GMT
Viewed: 
112 times
  
In lugnet.people, Maggie Cambron writes:
In lugnet.people, Dave Schuler writes:
In lugnet.people, David Schwanke writes:

B) Ive been told that if I open this topic up there I am liable to never
want to come back to lugnet again.

.debate doesn't suffer fools gladly, no. If you just waltz in there  and
tell people you have some Good News for them, you're not likely to get a
warm reception.

It's a real lions' den to walk into, that's for sure.  Not for the faint of
heart, but if your faith can handle some vigorous argument

and some silliness, and you have the common sense to tell which is which,
(something not mentioned by PuddingHead Dave!)

then you should
be fine.

The whole thing does belong somewhere in ot.  Personally I don't think
there's enough levity in these posts for ot.fun, but it's probably best to
take it there for now and expect a few one liners and quips from people
trying to lighten it up.

If I had my druthers, I'd really rather it went straight to .debate... I
don't think there's any levity at all in this subthread. I'm the curator of
.fun and .geek (which gives me no extra authority to force things to go any
particular place, but which does give the expectation that I've thought
about proper compartmentalization in this area, and I have) and I just don't
see it as the sort of topic that gets put in .fun

Do what Mags said, lurk first. Lurk a LOT.

Read some of the big theology threads so you know you aren't going to be
covering plowed ground. Then, if you must, plunge in. But by now most
.debate readers presumably know what you want to say already, so why say it
unless you have a new twist?

And consider starting a new thread rather than continuing this one, it's off
track from what Tim had in mind when he started it.

Good luck.



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community
 
Well. I am not looking for a big heavy discussion. If the participants arent going to be friendly then I am not intersted and that is the general vibe that I hear about it. I am also not interested in deep theological discusions. I didnt come here (...) (22 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community
 
(...) I'm not as compartmentalized a dork here as some, but with every post I read in this thread I only restrain myself from saying "take it to ot.debate" for the same reason given to you by others and by Dave! (...) The whole thing does belong (...) (22 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.people, lugnet.fun.community)

200 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR