/gzg/list: codes

first off, i think mr martin's suggestion is an excellent one, and i for one
will use it.

now i can simply skip that immense thread on 'can i mount this on my APC in
sg2' as i personally do not play sg2 and so could not care less, whilst others
i am sure will find it riveting.

just seperating the list + subject tokens and the true subject allows
confusion with non-coded messages, so might i advocate the use of
slashes as i have done? sorry to introduce an incompatible version
'upgrade' at so early a stage :-).

so, fyi+afaik, you might see such things as:

/gzg/ft2: pulse torpedo query
/gzg/xt: thruster pushes revisited
/gzg/ft: naming UN ships
/gzg/ds2: weapon proposal
/gzg/sg2: killing power armour
/gzg/b5: painting narn ships
/gzg/fh: political status of madagascar
/gzg/ot: space wombles
/gzg/list: revision 3.7 of Martin codes

is 'extra thrust' actually the name for the rules in the fleet book? is this
indeed what you were referring to? if not, we should put 'fb', for 'fleet
book'.

the gzg/ft message applies to all versions of full thrust (even ft1, for
those who remeber it!).

i have abbreviated 'future history' to 'fh'.

is this right?

we might even subdivide at some point: if we keep coming back to the UN
(its organisation, role, reraltionships with other powers - there's a
lot to it), we might put /gzg/fh/un, but i hope this day will be a long
time coming :-).

i would say that, to contain proliferation of subjects, messages should be
assigned to a game where at all possible.

andrew - how about being the referee on this and writing up a little
instruction sheet?

> Tom wrote:

Thank you!

> just seperating the list + subject tokens and the true subject allows

    We must be sure to allow Windows\DOS users to use "\" as well as
"/".
The truly enlightened can just use a space character, then just separate the
code from the real subject content with a non-alpanumeric separator like
colon (:) or dash (-).

> is 'extra thrust' actually the name for the rules in the fleet book? is

    Full Thrust (FT), More Thrust (MT), next edition - eXtra Thrust
(XT). I
think it fits. Except for the Fleet Book (FB)! Or we could call it FT:TNG for
ST:TNG fans. Or FT3.

> i have abbreviated 'future history' to 'fh'.
Seems OK to me. People who are really into this topic should feel free to send
a better or easier to understand abreviation or mnemonic.

> we might even subdivide at some point: if we keep coming back to the UN

    Or gzg/fh/NAC, ...FSE, ...NSL, ...PAU and so on.

Andrew spake thusly upon matters weighty:

> >i have abbreviated 'future history' to 'fh'.

How about HIS or HIST? We all pretty much know it is future history we are
talking about.

/************************************************

On Tue, 25 Aug 1998 11:02:21 +1200, Andrew Martin <Al.Bri@xtra.co.nz>
wrote:

> Full Thrust (FT), More Thrust (MT), next edition - eXtra Thrust

Well, I'm not crazy about this codes, particularly since I'm used to the more
common [CODE] type used in Usenet. Whichever code style used, though, we
should stick with FT2 and FT3 as the codes, not XT, FT:TNG, etc. FT2 and FT3
are already pretty common. FB for the fleet book is fine. Don't forget EFSB
for the Earthforce Sourcebook rules...