|
|
| Author |
Message |
mark1
|
|
New "kids/teens conference?
| 
Jan 8 23:57 UTC 1999 |
How about a Kids/teen's conference? I want one. Inbetween just ain't what
i like!
|
| 59 responses total. |
scg
|
|
response 1 of 59:
|
Jan 9 00:53 UTC 1999 |
What do you want this conference to be about, and how would it be different
from what InBetween could be?
I don't think the InBetween conference, at the moment, is something anybody
is too happy about. Many of us former active InBetween users are now in our
early to mid 20s, still making occasional smalltalk in the conference while
waiting for a new generation to come in and take it over. Being mostly
inactive, it's there waiting for you or somebody else to come in and do
whatever you think needs to be done with it.
|
steve
|
|
response 2 of 59:
|
Jan 9 08:11 UTC 1999 |
But maybe that next generation wants to call it something else.
Or not have the previous clutter there. I can readily see what you
are saying Steve, but maybe its better to close inbetween down and
save it; let the next generation of young grexers make up their own
little world.
|
mark1
|
|
response 3 of 59:
|
Jan 12 21:06 UTC 1999 |
Could we call it The Hangout?
PLEEEEEEEEEEEEESE?????
(sorry!)
|
steve
|
|
response 4 of 59:
|
Jan 12 23:29 UTC 1999 |
Why not?
|
zook107
|
|
response 5 of 59:
|
Jan 13 19:14 UTC 1999 |
yeah why not? (chuckle)
|
richard
|
|
response 6 of 59:
|
Jan 13 23:05 UTC 1999 |
well now, "In Between", as it refers to being between youth and\
maturity doesnt really refer to age. I dont think that just because
the founders of In Between are in their 20's now means they aare
really not still "In between" I mean there is a part of all of us
that either never really grows up or takes its time growing up.
Dont shut "In Between" down, just broaden its scope a bit, maybe
re-start it
|
richard
|
|
response 7 of 59:
|
Jan 13 23:26 UTC 1999 |
but this does bring up the point that maybe grex needs to have a
policy about when to delete dead confs. grex has confs where the
fw is no longer on the system and are completely inactive. Others
like "Inbetween" havent had a new item entered in two years. The
question is does it turn new users off of conferencing if they joint
a conf that turns out to be dead or inactive. If they see one
inactive conf do they get the idea that any conf they join is going
to also be similarly inactive.
perhaps cfadmin needs to consider the importance of new users seeing
active confs, and therefore needs to police the inactive ones and
close them down ultimately if enough time is passed?
|
scott
|
|
response 8 of 59:
|
Jan 13 23:48 UTC 1999 |
Why would Grex need to delete inactive conferences? Disk is very cheap.
|
steve
|
|
response 9 of 59:
|
Jan 13 23:58 UTC 1999 |
Yup. And only cheaper as time goes by, too. Also, 1M of disk goes a
lot farther in terms of conferencing than mail or html code or anything
else that uses disk.
|
hhsrat
|
|
response 10 of 59:
|
Jan 14 01:57 UTC 1999 |
Maybe instead of creating a new conference for young people, we could do
for inbetween what Agora does - change everything that's in there now to
being oldinbetween, and have a fresh start for inbetween - new fw's, and
hopefully some new items
|
krj
|
|
response 11 of 59:
|
Jan 14 02:30 UTC 1999 |
regarding the old conference issue: perhaps what we want is some sort of
a clearly delineated conference archive or graveyard, so that newcomers can
easily tell the difference between "live" conferences and moribund ones.
|
aruba
|
|
response 12 of 59:
|
Jan 14 02:38 UTC 1999 |
Right, krj said what I was going to say. I think Richard's point about
newcomers being turned off when everything seems to be inactive is a valid
one. It would be nice to make it clear to them where the current activity
can be found, so they can go there if that's what's most important to them.
But we certainly shouldn't make it too hard to reinvigorate an aging
conference.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 13 of 59:
|
Jan 14 03:40 UTC 1999 |
Why shouldn't there be a new conference with a new name? Seems to me that it's
reasonable for a new generation to want their own conference. What's the
point of "recycling" Inbetween if younger kids want their own virtual space.
We're not talking expensive real estate here.
|
steve
|
|
response 14 of 59:
|
Jan 14 04:44 UTC 1999 |
Heh. RIght.
I like the idea of putting the old confs somewhere, or altering the
banner to say they are read-only or whatever.
|
krj
|
|
response 15 of 59:
|
Jan 14 05:37 UTC 1999 |
I agree with csmcgee in #13 that it makes sense for a younger age cohort
to want their own new conference, to shape as they will. I would like
to see this pushed ahead & not get tangled up with an existing
"Inbetween" conference, which apparently "belongs" to an older cohort.
|
remmers
|
|
response 16 of 59:
|
Jan 14 13:48 UTC 1999 |
I agree with that too.
|
dpc
|
|
response 17 of 59:
|
Jan 14 16:45 UTC 1999 |
Me, too.
|
scg
|
|
response 18 of 59:
|
Jan 14 21:01 UTC 1999 |
That sounds fine to me too.
Thinking back on it, a good chunk of the fun with the InBetween conference
was starting it and getting it going.
|
janc
|
|
response 19 of 59:
|
Jan 14 22:21 UTC 1999 |
Cool. I too see no reason not to start "hangout" with mark1 and perhaps
someone else as fairwitnesses (two is usually better than one).
I agree that we should find a way to archive conferences. I don't know
that they need to be made "readonly" though that would be OK. But the
need to have a banner in their login screens that says
+----------------------------------------------------------+
| This conference has fallen out of active use. You are |
| welcome to read it, but don't expect much current |
| activity. If you would be interested in restarting it |
| please post an item in the "coop" conference requesting |
| a restart. Thanks. |
+----------------------------------------------------------+
There should also be a tag on the description in the conference list,
saying [INACTIVE] of something.
|
steve
|
|
response 20 of 59:
|
Jan 14 22:56 UTC 1999 |
Hmm. I wonder if it would be better to make it read only, to keep
the original participation seperate from things far later down the
road. Maybe I'm just bing silly, but once a conference is done I
think it should be frozen as it is. I realize that determining when
a conference is 'done' isn't easy.
|
richard
|
|
response 21 of 59:
|
Jan 14 23:16 UTC 1999 |
would it be possible to have a program users could run (call it "activity"
or something) where they could get a quick listing of which confs have
been currently or recently the most active. Im thinking of a program that
would list the confs by number of new items entered each month or two.
This would be a way of pointing new users to the confs that currently have
the most activity. Most users are going to want to go where the action
is, *if* they know where the action is.
|
scg
|
|
response 22 of 59:
|
Jan 14 23:18 UTC 1999 |
It's kind of neat to be able to go back into old conferences and start up a
discussion again that's been dormant for years. I'd hate to lose that.
|
steve
|
|
response 23 of 59:
|
Jan 14 23:26 UTC 1999 |
Well, I understand that feeling too. I did that with a 10 year old conf
on MTS.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 24 of 59:
|
Jan 15 00:12 UTC 1999 |
I think some users like to go where the action *isn't*.
|