Re: Kindereggs
klaasbil_remove_the_spamkiller_@xs4all.nl (Klaas Bil) wrote:
>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:40:06 -0600, Ken Fuchs <kfuchs@winternet.com>
>wrote:
>>Isn’t the purpose of the “Just Conversation” forum to put (or start) off
>>topic threads so the rec.sport.unicycling charter regarding off topic
>>threads isn’t violated, yet people can continue to enjoy those off topic
>>threads via unicyclists.com?
>Agreed, except for the minor point that I don’t think that MOVING
>threads to JC is included in its purpose (as stated when JC was
>created).
You are right. I was just thinking that since threads in the
unicyclist.com forum rec.sport.unicycling can be put into the Spam
forum, shouldn’t off topic threads be put in “Just Conversation” or some
new “Off topic” forum that also doesn’t propagate to the newsgroup.
>However, my point is that a reply (to a moved thread) by
>people like me, whose (primary) access to this online community is via
>Usenet, would cause (part of) the thread to reappear on the RSU forum.
>Because that forum is the only one linked to the newsgroup and vice
>versa.
Yes, a reply from the rsu newsgroup or rsu mailing to any off topic
post would cause that reply to start a new thread on unicyclist.com
However, in general, newsgroup users and many mailing list users
understand and observe netiquette rules and are far less likely to post on
off topic subjects or reply to them. Many unicyclist.com members don’t
seem to even know netiquette, much less understand or observe (comply
with) them.
>And obviously, on Usenet the thread continues to exist
>regardless of any putting it into another forum at unicyclist.com.
Yes, but newsgroup users and mailing list users will very likely allow
off topic threads to die. There’s also the possibility of killing
USENET posts, but that is complicated, gets into censorship issues and
I’m not seriously suggesting it anyway.
Sincerely,
Ken Fuchs <kfuchs@winternet.com>