Subject:
|
Re: Thoughts on breaking out a pneumatics subgroup
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 9 Feb 2000 20:01:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1051 times
|
| |
|
|
I agree with you, Peter. Usually there are somewhere between 10 and 30
postings to this group per day. It shouldn't be too difficult to find the
pneumatics postings among them.
The daily number of postings as it is now is enough to keep a healthy
discussion going. Moving parts of the postings to specialised groups will
benefit no one.
Arjen
"Peter A. Vogel" <pavogel@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:FpoGtB.47p@lugnet.com...
-- snip
> Just to express the contrarian view: I think it is a bad idea. Too often • I
> see subgroups created that languish due to a lack of volume. There's a
> certain "critical mass" needed to keep a group going, if one goes a week
> without postings, there is a tendency to "forget" about the group and it
> founders.
>
> Pneumatics is one way of achieving "action" in a Technic model (robotic
> or otherwise) and as such belongs as a part of the general Technic
> discussions,
> not subdivided away into oblivion (IMHO of course).
>
> Personally, I think LUGNET has way too much subdivision of some groups
> (Robotics comes to mind). I count 18 groups I have to subscribe to (via
> my newsreader) just to cover my interests, but about 2/3 of them haven't
> had a posting in months/weeks...
>
> -Peter
>
>
>
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Thoughts on breaking out a pneumatics subgroup
|
| (...) Just to express the contrarian view: I think it is a bad idea. Too often I see subgroups created that languish due to a lack of volume. There's a certain "critical mass" needed to keep a group going, if one goes a week without postings, there (...) (25 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
17 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
