View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
xo Site Admin
Joined: 09 Feb 2002 Posts: 466 Location: Los Angeles [comcast]
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2003 12:34 am Post subject: A home for inc's NAGs |
|
|
When I'm not busy putting the memberlist on spam lists, grousing about the goings-on in abmar, and proselytizing the benefits of 175MB encodes, I sometimes manage to squeeze in some web work. I'm happy to announce that inc's NAGs now have a home at http://abma.x-maru.org/nag/.
My involvement was shoehorning the NAGs into the faq engine (or was it the other way around?) with which you are all probably familiar, but the NAGs themselves are all inc's and I want to thank him for pushing forward such a cool addition to the newsgroup culture. They've led to some spirited discussions, but I think that's indicative of the NAGs success - people are reading and talking and thinking about these things.
Anyway, my idea for giving them a URL was so that they could be referred to outside of a newsgroup discussion context, and to have a reference point where they are all stored.
Thanks again, inc!
-xo |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Keikai
Joined: 18 Feb 2002 Posts: 178 Location: Miami, FL
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2003 7:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Looks good xo, I'm also a big fan of inc's NAGs. I'd like to hear inc's opinion on my only point of constructive criticism though:
I've always considered the NAGs as a subset of the FAQ rules that are most important and/or most abused (this may be an incorrect notion, I might add, so disabuse me if necessary). Now the "Your suggestion here" segment can be read to mean just suggesting existing rules for NAGwortiness, but I think it'll more be used for individuals griping like we see with the folks creating their own NAGs.
Really, I think there's plenty of healthy discussion about what should be a NAG and I think it'll be obvious when a new NAG should be added. Perhaps a comment for folks recommending a NAG to open a topic under Newsgroups Misc for discussion would be a good idea. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
(inc)
Joined: 18 Feb 2002 Posts: 356 Location: San Diego
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2003 9:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Much thanks to xo for all the effort.
Hehe.... xo wrote: | grousing about the goings-on in abmar | "ATTN: There were so many Inuyasha posts that I missed the repost of the first 2 eps... please repost? I thank you so much"
Keikai wrote: | that are most important and/or most abused | At the top level, for things that can actually damage the groups (hentai, floods, etc.) or are basic policy (no DBZ, etc.) I'd say this was true, but there is a subset that is more directed toward reducing the amount of BW wastage for individual downloaders -- things like indicating a dub or an rm for folks who would avoid such posts.
As you might have noticed in the groups, Same Guy tends to think I'm being to nit-picky. I won't bother repeating that text, but one thing has occurred to me after my last reply to him -- as a relative newcomer, he may be thinking in terms of divx3, divx4, etc. -- actually I was thinging more in terms of RM, vivo, xvid, generic divx etc. -- things that determine whether someone might actually choose to download something. Hmmm.....
Keikai wrote: | it'll more be used for individuals griping like we see with the folks creating their own NAGs | That was kind of a later throw-in idea by me, and, frankly I didn't think of your angle -- figured most griping would be under the individual nags -- but, yeah, you know someone will put "##???? No more nags". What do you think, xo? Leave it for the moment and just see what happens?
(inc) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Keikai
Joined: 18 Feb 2002 Posts: 178 Location: Miami, FL
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2003 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | At the top level <snip> I'd say this was true, but there is a subset that is more directed toward reducing the amount of BW wastage for individual downloaders -- things like indicating a dub or an rm for folks who would avoid such posts. | True, but those are in the FAQ too. So perhaps "most important, most abused, and most damaging" would be more accurate? Regardless, what I meant was that if something is worthy of a NAG it should already be in the FAQ (or be added to it). There shouldnt be incongruity between the two, I feel.
Quote: | As you might have noticed in the groups, Same Guy tends to think I'm being to nit-picky. I won't bother repeating that text, but one thing has occurred to me after my last reply to him -- as a relative newcomer, he may be thinking in terms of divx3, divx4, etc. -- actually I was thinging more in terms of RM, vivo, xvid, generic divx etc. -- things that determine whether someone might actually choose to download something. Hmmm..... | I've already posted two articles in that thread, one of them making exactly that point. I don't know why my posts aren't going through. I'm not going to repost them until tonight though. Although at the rate that discussion is going it'll be settled by then.
Quote: | What do you think, xo? Leave it for the moment and just see what happens? | Personally I think if its an already established rule or guideline that we haven't thought to put in the NAGs, then it needs to be discussed some first but ultimately it's up to your judgement. If it's something completely new, it needs to be discussed for inclusion in the FAQ.
Part of the reason I tend to argue (and have in the past) against addition of new NAGs except when really necessary is just to maintain their strength. No petty motivations are involved. Of course, times change so flexibility is necessary, I'm just urging great caution. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
(inc)
Joined: 18 Feb 2002 Posts: 356 Location: San Diego
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2003 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree about the faq/nag relationship Keikai. How about this image: I see the *nags* as more like notes taken by some student listening (rather attentively I would hope) to an Obi-Wan giving an insightful lecture on the ab(m)a faq. Of course you might end up with an occasional doodle in the margins, but the factual stuff is all a subset of the original.
I see Keikai's concern, xo, that the *suggest your own nag* might take them out of the range of the faq -- instead, how about a sticky "FAQ/NAG discussion under Newgroup Misc. Instead of a text box, a link from 27. ??? could go right into that thread. Opinions?
As, for your non-appearing messages, Keikai, I noted in the ng that Newscene did the same caching thing to me last week , and as RR has been having fun reseting servers , I've switched all text posts to EN.
(inc) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Keikai
Joined: 18 Feb 2002 Posts: 178 Location: Miami, FL
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2003 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
(inc) wrote: | I agree about the faq/nag relationship Keikai. How about this image: I see the *nags* as more like notes taken by some student listening (rather attentively I would hope) to an Obi-Wan giving an insightful lecture on the ab(m)a faq. Of course you might end up with an occasional doodle in the margins, but the factual stuff is all a subset of the original. | *laugh* Yeah, we're on the same page.
(inc) wrote: | I see Keikai's concern, xo, that the *suggest your own nag* might take them out of the range of the faq -- instead, how about a sticky "FAQ/NAG discussion under Newgroup Misc. Instead of a text box, a link from 27. ??? could go right into that thread. Opinions? | I'm definately playing devils advocate here. I'm probably overreacting, but it was the only thing that nagged me a bit.
(inc) wrote: | As, for your non-appearing messages, Keikai, I noted in the ng that Newscene did the same caching thing to me last week , and as RR has been having fun reseting servers , I've switched all text posts to EN. | Aha! Okay thanks for letting me know. I'll use giganews for posting text posts for a while and see how that goes. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
xo Site Admin
Joined: 09 Feb 2002 Posts: 466 Location: Los Angeles [comcast]
|
Posted: Fri May 16, 2003 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
(inc) wrote: | how about a sticky "FAQ/NAG discussion under Newgroup Misc. Instead of a text box, a link from 27. ??? could go right into that thread.
|
Sounds good to me - I went ahead and implemented the above.
-xo |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|