I don't disagree, but I don't think this should be a top-level group. If ~misc is Tildes' variant of alt on the Usenet, then it could be ~misc.pets to mirror alt.pets.
I don't disagree, but I don't think this should be a top-level group. If ~misc is Tildes' variant of alt on the Usenet, then it could be ~misc.pets to mirror alt.pets.
I feel like it's more fit under ~life. Its description goes: and I think pets are family indeed. So ~life.pets. Not all animals are pets, but then that content could go to ~news or ~science, with...
I feel like it's more fit under ~life. Its description goes:
Topics related to our personal (and professional) lives - work, school, families, relationships, parenting, etc. [emphasis mine]
and I think pets are family indeed. So ~life.pets. Not all animals are pets, but then that content could go to ~news or ~science, with a tag "animals" or "zoology" (or subgroups like ~news.animals and ~science.zoology).
@Fosse22: don't think of groups like subs. Subs are about communities and niches, groups are more about categorisations. Have a look at how they're defined. Actually, any newbie should read the entirety of the docs IMO, it amounts to a few pages of text and totally relevant.
There's been some previous discussion on fluff-like content: https://tildes.net/~tildes.official/jz/daily_tildes_discussion_why_should_we_allow_or_not_allow_fluff_content...
There's been some previous discussion on fluff-like content:
I think there's a case to be made for a group that discusses keeping pets, including pet health - which is an entirely different beast to a group for posting cute animal pics. (Although, I concede...
I think there's a case to be made for a group that discusses keeping pets, including pet health - which is an entirely different beast to a group for posting cute animal pics. (Although, I concede it's not clear what @Fosse22 is actually asking for.)
What are you wanting from a ~pets or ~animals ?
I don't disagree, but I don't think this should be a top-level group. If ~misc is Tildes' variant of alt on the Usenet, then it could be ~misc.pets to mirror alt.pets.
I feel like it's more fit under ~life. Its description goes:
and I think pets are family indeed. So ~life.pets. Not all animals are pets, but then that content could go to ~news or ~science, with a tag "animals" or "zoology" (or subgroups like ~news.animals and ~science.zoology).
@Fosse22: don't think of groups like subs. Subs are about communities and niches, groups are more about categorisations. Have a look at how they're defined. Actually, any newbie should read the entirety of the docs IMO, it amounts to a few pages of text and totally relevant.
I also think it doesn't hurt for those of us who've been here a while to look over the docs every now and then either.
There's been some previous discussion on fluff-like content:
I think there's a case to be made for a group that discusses keeping pets, including pet health - which is an entirely different beast to a group for posting cute animal pics. (Although, I concede it's not clear what @Fosse22 is actually asking for.)