new Google Group - just experimenting

[Jeff Wexler]

Since I have been on location I have been accessing r.a.m.p.s. through Google usenet access instead of my usual usenet newsreader (which requires access to ISP server newsgroups). Google has re-designed Google Groups and I rather like the format that it has taken on. So, as a possible alternative to this Discussion Group (we have 352 members, 3942 posts to date) I have put up a Google Group as jwsound.net discussion group. I am not retiring this forum but I did want to experiment with other formats in case in the future we get tired of this particular forum format.

Anyone interested can try the Google Group out --- and if no one wishes to look into it, that's fine also. Even though I set this thing up, I am not exactly sure how people "join up." I know you need a Google sign up first and then you need to be INVITED (that's the way I set it up for a little bit more control) by emailing me with your name and email address you wish to use for the Google Group.

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/jwsound/topics

my emails, of course, are: < jw@jwsound.net > and < jwsound@gmail.com >

Regards,  Jeff Wexler

[Jeff Wexler]

Replying to my own post:  I don't want anyone to feel obligated to check out the Google Group, I know it is quite a pain to try and keep track of all these forums for expression --- I am really just playing around with the FORM of these groups. I do not want to the good, thoughtful content of this Discussion Group to be diluted by having too many things to monitor and with people having to decide "where do I want my voice heard" taking all of our attention. So, please feel free to IGNORE the Google Group, but please keep the participation here going --- it has been very helpful, instructive and illuminating for all of us.

Thanks, your host,  Jeff Wexler

[Eric Burge]

Does this mean you're bagging the idea? I haven't checked in to the new forum yet so don't know if there is discussion over there regarding this subject.

EB

[Eric Toline]

Does this mean you're bagging the idea? I haven't checked in to the new forum yet so don't know if there is discussion over there regarding this subject.

EB

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

I checked it out on the Google link. What complicated sign up process. Personally I'm happy with this forum as I've finally figured it out somewhat but I would love to know how to get the newest posts to the bottom of the threads instead of at the top.

Eric

[Jeff Wexler]

I am not abandoning this Discussion Group at all --- no worries...  just playing around with another type of group. As for the best the way to use THIS group, I think trhe ordering of posts is a global setting that I have to make and it affects everyone's view. So, newest posts are at the top I believe for everyone. My general practice is to click on the bit of text that says: "Show unread posts since last visit" and that works for me. I will look into what else could be done to make this thing function better.

-  Jeff Wexler

[jason porter]

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

...I would love to know how to get the newest posts to the bottom of the threads instead of at the top.

Eric

Eric,

Here is what I did, it works for me, but no guarantees!

-JP

1. click on PROFILE (your profile settings)

2. on the left side menu, click on LOOK AND LAYOUT PREFERENCES

3. in the main body of the page you will see a list of checkboxes,  make sure SHOW MOST RECENT POSTS AT THE TOP is UNCHECKED.

[Jeff Wexler]

Eric,

Here is what I did, it works for me, but no guarantees!

-JP

1. click on PROFILE (your profile settings)

2. on the left side menu, click on LOOK AND LAYOUT PREFERENCES

3. in the main body of the page you will see a list of checkboxes,  make sure SHOW MOST RECENT POSTS AT THE TOP is UNCHECKED.

Thanks, Jason, I think that does work and should solve Eric's problem. Clever of you to find that in personal profiles, I was not even sure it was an option. I do question why Eric, or anyone else, would want most recent post at the bottom of the rest, it always seems to me that at the top is the best place for most recent...  but it is good I supppose that each user can have it the way they want it.

Regards,  Jeff Wexler

[Eric Toline]

[quote author=Jeff Wexler

I do question why Eric, or anyone else, would want most recent post at the bottom of the rest, it always seems to me that at the top is the best place for most recent...  but it is good I supppose that each user can have it the way they want it.

Regards,  Jeff Wexler

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Because it makes it easier to read and follow top to bottom. Every other group I read lays it out, original post at the top and replys below it. Think of the replys at the top as top posting.

Eric 

[Eric Toline]

Just unchecked the newest posts at the top thing and now it's just the  way I like it.

Eric

[soundtrane]

Dear Jeff,

Hope you are having fun in Paris! I just saw a Claude Berri film and i was thinking of you when I saw the streets of Paris!

Thanks for the invite to the new google beta group, i got a mail saying i was approved.

best

-vin

[Noah Timan]

Since I have been on location I have been accessing r.a.m.p.s. through Google usenet access instead of my usual usenet newsreader (which requires access to ISP server newsgroups). Google has re-designed Google Groups and I rather like the format that it has taken on. So, as a possible alternative to this Discussion Group (we have 352 members, 3942 posts to date) I have put up a Google Group as jwsound.net discussion group. I am not retiring this forum but I did want to experiment with other formats in case in the future we get tired of this particular forum format.

I've been using Google for RAMPS for years -- it's much quicker than using the newsgroup servers as you can simply click on the threads you have interest in without having to sift through everything.  That said, there are some benefits to your current forum setup over google.  What I like most here is that one can see all of the posts from that day and see which threads are very active -- there is also a way to do this with google, but it is more difficult there because if you are off for a few days it can pile up and it becomes easier to miss new and interesting messages.  It's also easier and more pleasing to the eye to sift through the threads here than on google, where it only loads ten messages at the time and the interface for navigating through the tree is a bit clumsy.

.02

[old school]

Hey all, another sat. and I'm working in downtown LA. My Brother Moe is on another comercial shooting 3 blocks away by the 6th street bridge. My son Case is booming a low budg movie with Easystreet McKee in a dive bar 6 blocks north of us, what can I say, we are thick as thieves in LA. As to getting on R.A.M.P.S. through google, I didn't know there was any other way. Oh well, live an learn... Hey Jeff, hope you n Don are having a great time in Paris, and for my 2cents, I like the site just as it is.

Old School

[Jeff Wexler]

Hey Crew, it's like the whole family is working together, just not on the same shoot! Good to hear everyone is working and it sounds like you're all having fun. We are not having so much fun in Paris (Paris is great but the work is not) but we'll be coming home soon at the end of this week.

As for the Google Group, I will keep it up and continue to play around with it, but I think the consensus willo be that this Forum-style group, even with its faults, is still pretty terrific and has a good feel to it.

Thank you Noah for your comments on the form of this group vs. Google, and also I am pleased that Eric was able to set things up the way he likes them to be displayed (something you cannot do with Google Groups).

Regards,  Jeff Wexler