A chat room for Cue makers and repair people only. Where you could only get an access password from the moderator if you qualify.
This section could use!
- Thread starter Michael Webb
- Start date
Michael Webb said:
I dont know about that Mike.
It sounds like a good idea but what would cue makers talk to each other about?
Most cue makers that want to talk to other cue makers just use the phone ... more privacy.
Yahoo has a Cue Makers group (as you know) but very little gets posted there.
Isnt there any underground secret societies like the Masons, or the Skull and Bones that cue makers can join?
I guess not as a cue maker of my caliber would have been invited to join them long ago.
Besides ... some cue makers get a big ego boost answering some of the meaningless and irrelevant questions that get posted here.
(I know I do).
mike i like the idea i think they should do that is there chat rooms on az now at all?
there could be a test that you have to pass to get the pass word.
Mike is the mod..............
<~~~thinks he should set up all the rules, by laws and access qualifications.......
<~~~thinks he should set up all the rules, by laws and access qualifications.......
KJ Cues said:
As usual I agree with you totally but this is out of our hands, I might be a pain in the ass sending emails to Mike asking him to filter certain threads when they get out of hand, in all honesty just really tired of doing it because I like this place, so I like the overall alternative.
http://sheldoncue.com/irc <---- java applet for an IRC channel.Michael Webb said:
If you have an irc client, simply connect to /server 68.209.232.36:6667 and /join #pool
I doubt it will need passworded, but that CAN be arranged.
If you use the applet, once you join you can change your nickname by typing:
/nick yourname
Last edited:
GREAT!Sheldon said:
Teach me Mastercam live!
Michael Webb said:
Mike....from a non-makers' point of view, I have to say that for me, the "Ask the Cuemakers" section has been one of my favorite sections. I have learned more about cues here, from a construction standpoint, than anywhere else on AZ. The information on suitable woods for use in different cues' construction is worth the price of admission for me alone.
However, with that said...I can understand where you are coming from with regards to exchanging info/materials between cuemakers alone. I suppose a totally different section allowing access to only cuemakers would be okay....I would just hope that it wouldn't detract from the other info that some of us truly value that can be learned here. I know that for me, it has helped me a lot with regards as to what materials and possible specs I would like my cues crafted of.
Lisa
^
Yup. Thnx.
Gotta go now. Lunch then REAL WORK.
Joey~Not a full-time maker. Just a tech and a wood hacker~
Yup. Thnx.
Gotta go now. Lunch then REAL WORK.
Joey~Not a full-time maker. Just a tech and a wood hacker~
ridewiththewind said:Mike....from a non-makers' point of view, I have to say that for me, the "Ask the Cuemakers" section has been one of my favorite sections. I have learned more about cues here, from a construction standpoint, than anywhere else on AZ. The information on suitable woods for use in different cues' construction is worth the price of admission for me alone.
However, with that said...I can understand where you are coming from with regards to exchanging info/materials between cuemakers alone. I suppose a totally different section allowing access to only cuemakers would be okay....I would just hope that it wouldn't detract from the other info that some of us truly value that can be learned here. I know that for me, it has helped me a lot with regards as to what materials and possible specs I would like my cues crafted of.
Lisa
You know, Lisa has a very good point. Is it fair to exclude those that have a real interest in learning? Also, some of the better posts make for very good reading even for those who aren't CMs. I know, the situation is screaming for a solution.
This may be a bit severe, but could the use of the 'neg rep' button be considered a form of voting? Just throwing this out there for thought. There may already be systems in place that we can use to deal with this. A problem is only a problem `til a solution is found. Then it's just a memory.
Perhaps if a cuemaker were assigned as a Moderator for the section alone, that might work, with regards that those who have a keen interest, that may not be a cuemaker, would have to request posting abilities.
I think that limiting one's ability to add content to the section, would help to alleviate those who would like to create dissention...but still allow those who like to read the volumes of information access, and if they are deemed to have valid input overall, allow for posting abilities as well.
If that would be too much.....then limit all who are not cuemakers to a 'read only' status. If they had a pertinent question, they could then submit said query to the Moderator of the Cuemaker section, who could then post it up for discussion. This would still allow those who have an interest the ability to read the discussion, without interfering in it.
Just a few thoughts on how to continue to allow the sharing of information, without the section becoming completely exclusionary.
Lisa
I think that limiting one's ability to add content to the section, would help to alleviate those who would like to create dissention...but still allow those who like to read the volumes of information access, and if they are deemed to have valid input overall, allow for posting abilities as well.
If that would be too much.....then limit all who are not cuemakers to a 'read only' status. If they had a pertinent question, they could then submit said query to the Moderator of the Cuemaker section, who could then post it up for discussion. This would still allow those who have an interest the ability to read the discussion, without interfering in it.
Just a few thoughts on how to continue to allow the sharing of information, without the section becoming completely exclusionary.
Lisa
I nominate Mike and KJ.