|
|
| Author |
Message |
i
|
|
Grex System Announcements Item
| 
Dec 22 04:53 UTC 1998 |
This item is for system announcements (new computer equipment on Grex,
system upgrades, Grex meetings, etc.). Personal announcements should go
back in item 2; Grex system *problems* belong in the next item (#4).
|
| 156 responses total. |
gregb
|
|
response 1 of 156:
|
Dec 23 19:40 UTC 1998 |
Walter, considering the nature of this conf., would it be prudent to
make it a read-only area for the regular users? Just a thought.
|
remmers
|
|
response 2 of 156:
|
Dec 23 19:48 UTC 1998 |
Yeah, then we wouldn't have to put up with responses like #1. :)
|
aruba
|
|
response 3 of 156:
|
Dec 23 20:07 UTC 1998 |
Re #1: Not sure what you mean by "read-only for the regular users" Greg.
I'm happy with the way these first few items have worked in the past.
|
remmers
|
|
response 4 of 156:
|
Dec 23 20:18 UTC 1998 |
I think he means a place where staffish types can post announcements but
which is read-only for others. Such a place already exists -- the motd
-- so I think it's nice to have an open one in addition (this item).
|
gregb
|
|
response 5 of 156:
|
Dec 23 23:29 UTC 1998 |
Hmmm, upon relection (gotta get rid of those mirrors), I can see where
various responses might be useful. Forget I said anything.
|
aruba
|
|
response 6 of 156:
|
Jan 2 23:24 UTC 1999 |
There will be a Grex potluck at my place this Friday - see item 47 for
details.
|
davel
|
|
response 7 of 156:
|
Jan 3 18:54 UTC 1999 |
Hmm. Since this is item #76 (in helpers), & 47 showed no new activity, I can
only suppose that you mean agora item 47?
|
aruba
|
|
response 8 of 156:
|
Jan 4 05:14 UTC 1999 |
Yes, Winter '99 agora item 47. (Sorry I didn't notice this item was linked.)
|
steve
|
|
response 9 of 156:
|
Jan 4 06:43 UTC 1999 |
Grex was off the net for about 1.5 hours on Monday January 4th from about
12.15am to 1.45am.
|
gregb
|
|
response 10 of 156:
|
Jan 4 20:37 UTC 1999 |
Request to all: To help keep track of what response goes with which
msg., please try to remember to put the original msg. # in your
response. Some of these confs. have a rapid turnover, which means it's
possible to come into a conf and read msgs. that have no apparent
meaning, unless you know which msg. was the origin.
Those that are already doing this, it's appreciated.
|
senna
|
|
response 11 of 156:
|
Jan 5 13:51 UTC 1999 |
Request to all: Please don't paste inane repetitive messages like spam
all over agora.
|
senna
|
|
response 12 of 156:
|
Jan 5 13:52 UTC 1999 |
Woohoo, boy. I think sarcasm is dripping all over my keyboard, it'll
take forever to clean up. Sorry :)
|
rcurl
|
|
response 13 of 156:
|
Jan 5 18:15 UTC 1999 |
You might want to post that in all the conferences......
|
gregb
|
|
response 14 of 156:
|
Jan 6 15:00 UTC 1999 |
Re. 11: Since not everyone reads all the confs., it seemed logical to post
it this way. If there's an alternative that accomplishes the same goal, I'd
like to know.
|
toking
|
|
response 15 of 156:
|
Jan 6 16:34 UTC 1999 |
sure there is...walk up to everyone you see and pee on their
shoe...it'll be just about as annoying
|
albaugh
|
|
response 16 of 156:
|
Jan 6 16:58 UTC 1999 |
No, create an item announcing the "refer to response item # please" request,
then link that item to every other conference! :-)
|
aruba
|
|
response 17 of 156:
|
Jan 6 17:00 UTC 1999 |
Honestly, Greg, I don't really understand what response 10 means, becasue I
don't know what you mean by "message number" - do you mean for people to
refer to the response # they are replying to (so I should have said "Re #14"
at the beginning of this), or do you mean I should put the item number (in
this case, 3) in each response?
|
gregb
|
|
response 18 of 156:
|
Jan 6 17:17 UTC 1999 |
Re. 17: Response #. Sorry for the confusion.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 19 of 156:
|
Jan 6 17:29 UTC 1999 |
It might have been better if this idea had been posted not as an
identical (somewhat unclear) response in many conference, but as
a specific comment in a conference about a particular response (which
had not identified the response to which it was responding). After
all, many responders do Re# in their responses.
|
senna
|
|
response 20 of 156:
|
Jan 6 20:06 UTC 1999 |
It might have been better just to use the "only" command to figure out what
messages they were referring to. Occasionally I miss the message someone's
referring to. I either ignore it or I scroll back and find out what they're
talking about or I use my deductive skills to get into the line of
conversation.
|
