Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/11/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]My two sheckles: doesn't seem to matter. The ultimate location will show up on a web search whether or not it was it's own domain so someone interested would find it either way. Having said that, it would be fun to be lugnuts.org. Cheers Kevin Hoffberg - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Francesco Sent: Monday, November 23, 1998 11:33 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us; leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] mini LUG site? From private emails to me in the past week I understand that the majority of you do not care whether there is a domain name or not, and that a Leica section on my travel photo site would be fine. This email is a request for further opinions on this before I make a final decision. Francesco At 04:07 AM 11/23/98 , Greg Locke wrote: >At 06:10 PM 22/11/98 -0800, you wrote: > >>At 03:10 PM 11/22/98 , Eric Welch wrote: >>>>www.leica_user.org is availible >>>>www.leicagroup.org is availible >>> >>>how about www.lugnuts.org or something like that? > >www.lugnuts.net is available. .ORG and .COM are taken. > > As has been mentioned, our own domain name is nice but not essential. >There seem to be enough members on the list with their own domains (and >webspace) that can offer easy access. > > > Eric, how much space do you think is needed? > (I'm calculating what space I may have available to offer) > >...and I assume those of use with scanners and prepare our own photos and >upload to the page designer? > >SEE! this is what happens when I'm home and in between assignments.... >...I get INVOLVED in stuff. > >cheers, > > > >Greg Locke <locke@straylight.ca> >St. John's, Newfoundland. ><http://www.straylight.ca/locke/> >---------------------------------- >"I've finally figured out what's wrong with photography. >It's a one-eyed man looking through a little 'ole. >Now, how much reality can there be in that?" -- David Hockney >