Subject:
|
Re: list/group merge (was RE: Newbie Question.. FAQ?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 5 Nov 1998 19:19:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2670 times
|
| |
|
|
I am not sure if this is the right thread, or the only thread on the
subject, but it seems close to what I have to say.
Although the "gateway" is now here, and I *NOT* (repeat not) advocating the
removal, I still want to say my two pickles.
Firstly, as a Lugnet.robotics user (not on the robotics mail list) I did not
think that the merger was the best idea. And, I feel there was very little
input or time given to Lugnet.robotics group before it was implemented. If
anyone wants to debate this point please bring the time and date of the
first PUBLIC mail on the topic, and the time and date of the mail announcing
the implementation. Don't forget to take into consideration time zones, and
that not everybody can look at there mail every day.
It will be convenient for those who were on both, and possibly inconvenient
for those who weren't on both. I could have subscribed to the mail list if
I was interested... I didn't choose to do that, but now I find I am
essentially subscribed to the list.
Yesterday, it donned on me that this was a step back towards RTL reading. I
now have to sort mails as to: ones I am interested in, ones I am not, and
ones I don't even understand.
Some excerpts from mails now hitting the Lugnet.robotics:
> I passed over the 828c handler last night, and did a first pass over
> 14c0 in the process. The struct is really like this: <snip>
> > Can egcs target the H8/300?
> Yep - egcs is gcc.
Good god! I heard someone talk of using a stepper motor... demons be gone!
(I am one of the puritans that Larry P. talked about). It has been said
that this will die down in a few months... oh great, just a few months. ;)
Do I think what the mailing list is doing for Mindstorms and Lego robotics
in general is good? YES! I think it is great. There is obviously many
people spending a lot of their time to figure out and improve on Mindstorms.
I thank you very much, I will likely use your work. But I want to look at
bumper bots and the creative work of builders that build an ANALOG of a
stepper motor with Lego, or design a mechanism that allows a simple touch
sensor to do amazing complex things. I am not a technophobe or tech-idiot;
I have and use Basic Stamps and microcontrolers (I am not anywhere near as
knowledgeable as some on the robotics list). And If Lugnet split robotics
into Mindstorms pure Lego, and robotics that uses Lego for structural fodder
(ooh, sorry about that little slip of personal bias) I would probably
subscribe to both. But I would scan the more robotic engineering one after
all other groups... if I had time. More often than not just marking as
read.
The gateway is here, and what is done is done. I only hope that if a split
is evident in the topics, that a split will be made. I have no doubt that
Todd will comply with general consensus.
This email is just my two pickles, since I didn't feel I got to say them
before the gateway was in place.
LINC
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: list/group merge (was RE: Newbie Question.. FAQ?
|
| (...) Linc, Here are the dates of a few of the key public mails on the subject (there were some 40 or 50 related and semi-related messages in all): Date Author Location ---...--- ---...--- ---...--- Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:45:54 GMT Matthew Miller (...) (26 years ago, 5-Nov-98, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: list/group merge (was RE: Newbie Question.. FAQ?
|
| (...) You missed the context. I'm pretty sure you would have understood this stuff had you been reading the lego-robotics list before it started dumping messages onto lugnet.robotics. And if this sort of thing was uninteresting to you, being on the (...) (26 years ago, 5-Nov-98, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
20 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- 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
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Robotics
|
|
|
|
|
|
