Subj : RE: anyone out there?
To   : All
From : yl112@cornell.edu
Date : Tue Jul 04 2000 02:28 am

From: yl112@cornell.edu
Subject: RE: anyone out there?



On Mon, 3 Jul 2000, Scott Royall wrote:

> Define "effective."

As in: I can get to people whose opinions I value, can generally get 
faster responses, and don't have to skim through lots of chaff that is 
relevant to others but not interesting to me.

As a non-echo example: if I want a book recommendation, it is more 
effective for me to go ask my sister than to poll a hundred sf/f 
readers.  Why?  Because my sister's tastes are very similar to mine, and 
where they aren't--well, both she and I know the difference.  OTOH I've 
read books that "random" other people liked (without knowing their 
general sf/f reading preferences) that *I* didn't like.  Stuff like that.

YHL

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	scott@conchbbs.com [mailto:scott@conchbbs.com] On Behalf Of
> yl112@cornell.edu
> Sent:	Monday, July 03, 2000 8:09 PM
> To:	Multiple recipients of AD&D MAILING LIST
> Subject:	RE: anyone out there?
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, 3 Jul 2000, Scott Royall wrote:
> 
> I'll wait and see how it turns out.  Frankly, these days I'm finding
> talking to a few people I know personally, either live or via email, is
> more effective than a general discussion group.  But who knows?  :-)
> 
> YHL
> 
> > Funny how 3 people have just reached the same conclusion  independently as
> I
> > did a while ago. Could it be a good idea? :)
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:	scott@conchbbs.com [mailto:scott@conchbbs.com] On Behalf Of Yune
> Kyung
> > Lee
> > Sent:	Monday, July 03, 2000 8:53 AM
> > To:	Multiple recipients of AD&D MAILING LIST
> > Subject:	RE: anyone out there?
> >
> >
> >
> > > At the moment I don't know of any particularly good website that
> > offers
> > > much *discussion.*  Hmm.  Perhaps that hole could be filled...?
> >
> > Yes--plenty of sites where you can game in message-board-like systems
> > (http://www.rondaksportal.com and http://www.macrayskeep.com leap to
> > mind) but not many that integrate games with discussion as fully as I
> > think there's potential for.
> >
> > Then again, these days there are many people who are only interested
> > in
> > one or the other (especially games) and would regard the encroachment
> > of
> > general rpg discussion or even other games in which they're not
> > participating as undesirable.  Exactly what do you mean by
> > integration?
> >
> >
> > --
> > |Fidonet:  liyet@bigfoot.com
> > |Internet: scott@conchbbs.com
> > |
> > | Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > |Fidonet:  royall@hal-pc.org
> > |Internet: scott@conchbbs.com
> > |
> > | Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
> >
> >
> 
> --
> |Fidonet:  yl112@cornell.edu
> |Internet: scott@conchbbs.com
> |
> | Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> |Fidonet:  royall@hal-pc.org
> |Internet: scott@conchbbs.com
> |
> | Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
> 

--
|Fidonet:  yl112@cornell.edu
|Internet: scott@conchbbs.com
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.


---
 # Origin:  (1:106/357.99)
 * Origin: ConchGate (1:106/357.0)

.