 | | Re: Memberships - so many people I don't know —Todd Lehman
|
| | | (...) Of course you can always step out of your "safe zone" periodically and check out groups/boards that you don't normally read. That way, you will have seized the opportunity to meet lots of people, rather than being passive and missing it. Just (...) (25 years ago, 28-Nov-99, to lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Memberships - so many people I don't know —Ed Jones
|
| | | | | (...) Of course I can, although I wouldn't call it a "safe zone". (...) [I wrote]: (...) and (...) clique. (...) That's a definitive given. [major snip - none of which I disagree with] (...) a (...) "Clique" was a poor choice of words. I have not (...) (25 years ago, 28-Nov-99, to lugnet.people)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Memberships - so many people I don't know —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) I didn't mean that to sound insulting -- sorry. (...) I thought of one other reason -- it has to do with name frequencies...see what you think about this theory: When scanning articles in newsgroups, there are usually a whole bunch of posts (...) (25 years ago, 28-Nov-99, to lugnet.people)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Memberships - so many people I don't know —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | Here's a data point for you: I scanned: (URL) as of right now (76 members), there are only 6 (1) names that I don't recognise. But then, I tend to remember a lot of stuff, no one likes to play Trivial Pursuit against me, and I haven't given up on (...) (25 years ago, 28-Nov-99, to lugnet.people)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Memberships - so many people I don't know —Ed Jones
|
| | | | | | (...) No need to apologize. I didn't take it as an insult. I wouldn't call it a "safe zone", more a "selected reading zone". (...) [snip] (...) Ack, I've got Todd over analysing (Aquarius with Virgo rising?). My whole point was simply that I didn't (...) (25 years ago, 29-Nov-99, to lugnet.people)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Memberships - so many people I don't know —Richard Franks
|
| | | | | | | (...) I have to wonder this too, it's either dedicated or paranoid ;) Richard (25 years ago, 29-Nov-99, to lugnet.people)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Memberships - so many people I don't know —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) 3000 wpm, 99+% comprehension was what I was clocked at last time I was clocked. But I said I'm not reading them all, merely skimming some of them... and on reflection, I lied. I don't read ANY of the non english loc groups as I don't know any (...) (25 years ago, 29-Nov-99, to lugnet.people)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Memberships - so many people I don't know —Kevin Wilson
|
| | | | | | (...) I find the time consumed is not so much reading, but skipping from one to the next and from group to group (even hitting one key and skipping takes time) and most of all, replying (like this <g>). I try and restrain myself from too many (...) (25 years ago, 29-Nov-99, to lugnet.people)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Memberships - so many people I don't know —Remy Evard
|
| | | | | Todd, have you ever calculated how many people read LUGNET articles vs. how many post articles? I.e. how many are lurking? The rule of thumb that I've seen for most major mailing lists and newsgroups is that 5-10% of the members actually post. I'd (...) (25 years ago, 28-Nov-99, to lugnet.people)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Memberships - so many people I don't know —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | (...) misc.jobs - 102754 unread messages. Download (Y/N)? And indeed, the effect you mention is visible there. There are no human readers anymore. (...) 300 messages per day is highly doable, 600 is a lot but still possible, and for a 1000 messages (...) (25 years ago, 29-Nov-99, to lugnet.people)
|
| | | | |
