From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 8 00:34:54 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id AAA08539; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 00:30:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.circle.net (smtp.circle.net [209.95.64.26]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E2D317E8C for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 00:30:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from r180m137.cybercable.tm.fr ([195.132.180.137]) by smtp.circle.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #2) id 13M41x-0007A4-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 07:42:34 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: sharpword001@pop.sharp-words.com Message-Id: Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 09:41:45 +0200 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: David Sharp Subject: Using mailing lists within a company Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, I'm seeking any information - book references, URLs, etc. - on configuring mailing lists within a largish company (several thousand employees) to optimise internal communication. This would include helpdesk type applications, the use of archived lists for intranet-type communications, and the ability to monitor list management to avoid the existence of "orphan lists" (ones that someone thought were a good idea, but which were then forgotten). I'm particularly interested in finding out whether it's necessary to buy commercial communication packages for such uses, or whether it can all be done just as well through astute configuration of lists under a program such as Majordomo, plus a bit of employee training. Any help appreciated. -- -- David Sharp, journaliste, France http://www.sharp-words.com/ Tel (home) 331 42 64 35 94 - (office) 331 40 41 47 92 E-mail ICQ: 16881741 From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 8 02:53:51 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id CAA10794; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 02:42:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from listes.cru.fr (listes.cru.fr [195.220.94.165]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6DE117E8C for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 02:42:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from home.cru.fr (home.cru.fr [195.220.94.79]) by listes.cru.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.2) with ESMTP id LAA12509 ; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 11:54:35 +0200 Received: from home.cru.fr (IDENT:aumont@localhost.cru.fr [127.0.0.1]) by home.cru.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.1) with ESMTP id LAA25259 ; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 11:54:34 +0200 Message-Id: <200008080954.LAA25259@home.cru.fr> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: David Sharp Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Using mailing lists within a company In-Reply-To: Message from David Sharp of "Tue, 08 Aug 2000 09:41:45 +0200." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 11:54:34 +0200 From: Aumont - Comite Reseaux des Universites Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I'm particularly interested in finding out whether it's necessary to > buy commercial communication packages for such uses, or whether it > can all be done just as well through astute configuration of lists > under a program such as Majordomo, plus a bit of employee training. Do you known the free (GPL) software named sympa ? It allow very large lists and a lot of configuration. One of them allows to create distribution list using an external database : sympa can contact you compagny database server and dynamically extract email of a category of employee. Sympa include a web interface for list administration and list subscribers including list archive with access control etc etc. http://listes.cru.fr/sympa From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 9 15:20:38 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA04825; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 15:15:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from square.systonic.fr (square.systonic.fr [212.234.39.7]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1285E17E8B for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 15:15:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.dolist.net (unverified [212.234.39.7]) by square.systonic.fr (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id ; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 00:26:20 +0200 Received: from 195.36.143.143 ([195.36.143.143]) by mail.dolist.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Thu, 10 Aug 2000 00:26:19 +0200 Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 00:26:18 +0200 From: Denis Olivier X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.45) Personal Organization: DOLIST.NET - http://www.dolist.net X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <2324543862.20000810002618@dolist.net> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: List-Managers-Digest V9 #113 In-reply-To: <14716.11862.318082.133536@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> References: <396C903F.8C4B54C@uni-bonn.de> <200007222018.e6MKIFP14547@mail.rev.net> <14716.11862.318082.133536@sws5.ctd.ornl.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antirelay: Good relay from local net2 212.234.39.0/24 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Bonjour, > No, actually... unless I"m missing something subtle in the sort args, the > list is sorted by *host*, and so all the mail.* hosts are lumped > together, regardless of domain, etc. rather than really sorting 'by > domain' which usually means dot-segment-right-to-left, so all the '.au's > are at the top, the '.edu's toward the middle and the '.za's at the end, > all of the *.hp.com and *.microsoft.com addresses sorted together, etc. Try the script listed here http://www.dolist.net/helpers.asp "A trick to optimize e-mail delivery for big lists. The idea is to write all e-mail for the same domains sequentially. For this you need to sort the members file by domain." You need the HAWK utility which is available for *nix & Win32. Thank you, -- Denis Olivier, ____________________________________________________________ DOLIST.NET, Internet E-mail List Server Technology DOLIST.NET information at : http://www.dolist.net From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 9 20:35:05 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id UAA07308; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 20:27:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 874A917E8B for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 20:27:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 11162 invoked by uid 100); 9 Aug 2000 23:39:33 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 23:39:33 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Denis Olivier Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: List-Managers-Digest V9 #113 In-Reply-To: <2324543862.20000810002618@dolist.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > "A trick to optimize e-mail delivery for big lists. The idea is > to write all e-mail for the same domains sequentially. For this > you need to sort the members file by domain." This usually turns out to be a poor tradeoff, it sends fewer bits over the wire but the overall list delivery is slower than delivering in random order, since random order gets you a lot more parallelism. Experienced list members will recognize this as the most contentious issue in the qmail vs. sendmail flame war, so you can look up the places this has been argued in the past. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 9 21:35:11 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA07798; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 21:24:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EF0117E8B for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 21:24:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e7A4adK25187; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 21:36:40 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 21:36:25 -0700 To: John R Levine , Denis Olivier From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: List-Managers-Digest V9 #113 Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 11:39 PM -0400 8/9/00, John R Levine wrote: > > "A trick to optimize e-mail delivery for big lists. The idea is >> to write all e-mail for the same domains sequentially. For this >> you need to sort the members file by domain." > >This usually turns out to be a poor tradeoff, it sends fewer bits over the >wire but the overall list delivery is slower than delivering in random order, >since random order gets you a lot more parallelism. Me, I stand firmly in both camps at once. What I do is model the system to figure out how much parallelism I can handle, and then split up my list into that many random chunks, and let the MTA worry about it from there... -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 10 12:04:32 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA18592; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:50:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hostigos.otherwhen.com (unknown [63.103.205.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84AF217E8B for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:50:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.otherwhen.com ([63.103.205.4]) by hostigos.otherwhen.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA33004 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:02:40 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from mavery@mail.otherwhen.com) Received: from PORKY/SpoolDir by mail.otherwhen.com (Mercury 1.48); 10 Aug 00 13:02:42 -0600 Received: from SpoolDir by PORKY (Mercury 1.48); 10 Aug 00 13:02:18 -0600 From: "Mike Avery" To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:02:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: List-Managers-Digest V9 #113 Reply-To: mavery@mail.otherwhen.com Message-ID: <3992A7D0.17723.2A3132@localhost> References: <2324543862.20000810002618@dolist.net> In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v4.0, pre-alpha) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 9 Aug 2000, at 23:39, John R Levine wrote: > > "A trick to optimize e-mail delivery for big lists. The idea is to > > write all e-mail for the same domains sequentially. For this you > > need to sort the members file by domain." > This usually turns out to be a poor tradeoff, it sends fewer bits over > the wire but the overall list delivery is slower than delivering in > random order, since random order gets you a lot more parallelism. > Experienced list members will recognize this as the most contentious > issue in the qmail vs. sendmail flame war, so you can look up the > places this has been argued in the past. And if you are using VERP or other similar protocols (if any) to customize the email to each user to automate bounce tracking, the advantage of sorting is pretty much eliminated as each subscriber will be getting their own copy anyway. Mike -- Mike Avery MAvery@mail.otherwhen.com Voice and fax (970)-642-0282 ICQ: 83558928 * Spam is for lusers who can't get business any other way * A Randomly Selected Thought For The Day: Everyone talks about apathy, but no one does anything about it. From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 14 06:17:27 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id GAA12994; Mon, 14 Aug 2000 06:05:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from roscoe.burstmedia.com (unknown [207.159.105.131]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9229017E8B for ; Mon, 14 Aug 2000 06:05:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by roscoe.burstmedia.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10) id ; Mon, 14 Aug 2000 09:20:30 -0400 Message-ID: From: Bob McCown To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: RemarQ Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 09:20:30 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Look at their webpage, lower left.... Yay! -=Bob From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 21 20:16:58 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id TAA07189; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 19:50:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DA8217E8B for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 19:50:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SeaPort1 ([63.196.185.150]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0FZO00HFBB1Y6Z@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 20:01:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 20:03:49 -0700 From: Dave Reinhardt Subject: need a clue To: Majordomo ListMgrs Message-id: <39A1ED9510E.46BFDAVE@mail.pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Becky! ver 1.26.02 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk seaport2:/# /usr/local/majordomo/wrapper config-test wrapper: Trying to exec /usr/local/majordomo/config-test failed: Input/output error Did you define PERL correctly in the Makefile? HOME is HOME=/usr/local/majordomo, PATH is PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/sbin:/usr/sbin, SHELL is SHELL=/bin/sh, MAJORDOMO_CF is MAJORDOMO_CF=/etc/majordomo.cf what have i missed Dave From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 21 20:31:51 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id UAA07437; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 20:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (mta6.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.240]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3834E17E8B for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 20:16:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SeaPort1 ([63.196.185.150]) by mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0FZO00D2MC6NZP@mta6.snfc21.pbi.net> for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 20:25:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 20:27:37 -0700 From: Dave Reinhardt Subject: printf 'From: dave@seaportnet.com\n\nhelp\nlists\n' | ./wrapper majordomo To: Majordomo ListMgrs Message-id: <39A1F329DC.46C4DAVE@mail.pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Becky! ver 1.26.02 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk printf 'From: dave@seaportnet.com\n\nhelp\nlists\n' | ./wrapper majordomo works fine, but will not work when request is made by eMail Dave From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 22 17:18:45 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA22373; Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:14:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9073317E8B for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:14:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e7N0RVH18854 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:27:33 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:23:36 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: comments? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Any thoughts? (it probably won't be a surprise that I agree with 99% of what he says, not if you've been listening to me babble the last few years...) -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 23 05:35:02 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id FAA01236; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 05:20:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tarsus.cisto.org (tarsus.cisto.org [151.196.211.15]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 003B417E8B for ; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 05:20:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from quill.thinkcoach.com (root@pop-mu-1-2-dialup-93.freesurf.ch [194.230.129.93]) by tarsus.cisto.org (8.9.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA00479; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 08:35:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from norbert@localhost) by quill.thinkcoach.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id OAA06216; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 14:31:38 +0200 Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 14:31:38 +0200 Message-Id: <200008231231.OAA06216@quill.thinkcoach.com> X-Authentication-Warning: quill.thinkcoach.com: norbert set sender to norbert@bni-zuerich.ch using -f From: Norbert Bollow Prefer-Language: de, en, fr To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: jakob@useit.com In-reply-to: (message from Chuq Von Rospach on Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:23:36 -0700) Subject: Re: comments? References: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > Any thoughts? > > After a lot of very good comments, Jakob Nielsen writes there: : Hopefully, mailing lists won't have much of a future. In the : long term, we need to remove everything from email that is not : in the nature of personal correspondence. I disagree here. Personal, one-on-one communication is done more efficiently via the telephone. The big strengths of email are: - that you can communicate to many people at the same time, who can read your message at different times of their own choice - that the recipients of a message can decide quickly whether they want to read the message immediately, later or never - that email can easily be forwarded - that it is so easy to include content from other text-based applications - that you can easily include a few lines of context with a response - that you can easily re-use email text for other purposes : For sure, the communications control panel would collapse : threads of discussions into a single object and visualize its : activity in a more useful manner than hundreds of scattered : lines in your inbox. What is needed is not to replace mailing lists by such a "communications control panel", but to improve email clients to offer the functionality you want. Mit freundlichen Grüssen Norbert Bollow -- BNI Empfehlungsmarketing, N. Bollow Geben und Gewinnen! Norbert Bollow, Weidlistr.18, CH-8624 Gruet http://bni-zuerich.ch Tel +41 1 972 20 14 Fax +41 1 972 20 19 Email zuerich@bni.com From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 23 09:50:44 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA03394; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 09:32:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A298517E8B for ; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 09:32:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from NY11019024B (kula [160.43.2.2]) by grassyhill.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA54526 for ; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:46:52 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from tneff@panix.com) From: "Tom Neff" To: Subject: Re: Nielsen's latest emission Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:45:45 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <200008230800.BAA26135@honor.greatcircle.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300 Importance: Normal Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chuq wrote: > Any thoughts? > > The usual Nielsen porridge of warmed-over platitudes and whimsical fiats, dressed in punditspeak to keep the career ball rolling. Jorn Barger takes a pretty good swipe at it here: http://www.deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=660644420 I think that, as usual, you could get approximately as good a prediction as Jakob's from this valuable Web resource: http://www.indra.com/resources/8ball/front.html From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 23 10:05:02 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA03424; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 09:34:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.rev.net (mail.rev.net [206.67.68.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 298F017E8E for ; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 09:34:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fantasy (USER4.GVA.NET [216.80.135.8]) by mail.rev.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e7NGmkp02944 for ; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:48:47 -0400 Message-Id: <200008231648.e7NGmkp02944@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:48:41 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: comments? In-reply-to: <200008231231.OAA06216@quill.thinkcoach.com> References: (message from Chuq Von Rospach on Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:23:36 -0700) X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 23 Aug 2000, at 14:31, Norbert Bollow wrote: > I disagree here. Personal, one-on-one communication is done more > efficiently via the telephone. The big strengths of email are: [...] Actually, looking at email from a long term perspective, email has always been, and I suspect always will be, probably the best means of one-on-one communication. If anything, I think the telephone will start to go by the wayside as things continue --- Truly symmetric telephone calls are rare --- as a rule, one party was looking for the other, and that other may or may not wish to deal with the first party *right*then* [but you hardly have a choice if they manage to catch you, do you?]. Requires that the called-party be findable. That the parties want to talk at the same time [which isn't such a slam-dunk when one is in Hawaii and the other in Berlin]. Some of the *biggest* wins of email, as sort of the killer-app of the early ARPAnet, was [and for *one*on*one* communication, and, IMO, still is and will be]: 1) it was fast. Just a minute or so from anywhere to anywhere else -- not so for mailing lists, where this one (list-mgrs), for example, seems to have a one or two hour delay built in, and most incur some sort of delay --- but one-on-one is, generally, seconds-in-transit 2) it eliminated time sync/zone considerations --- folks in europe could send email to us and we'd get it when we got in in the morning... we would send replies and they'd get it at the start of [their] next day, 3am or so our time, etc]. for the first time, the night-crew [the guys who'd come in at 4PM and work 'till sunup] could actually constructively exchange info with the day-folk... 3) it eliminated the problem of figuring out where someone was. Generally, telephones only work if you know the number where the person happens to be at that moment [not actually true now, with folks able to have national-roaming cell phones, but few ordinary folk have such toys]. But for email, a person could be on a trip or at a conference or even on vacation, and get your message and reply to it with little or no delay... no need for the "while you were out" message to sit on your desk for 14 days... 4) It allowed reasonable time management... Telephones are incredibly intrusive. I'm pretty disciplined and if I'm busy I just let the thing ring, but that drives my wife *insane*... as a rule, if you call me I was almost certainly doing something else and whether I am happy talking to you or not, the fact is that you interrupted me... with email, it just waits until I feel like messing with it and if I'm busy and can't get to 'routine correspondence' [much less 'random hobby-mailing-list' traffic, which is ghettoed off into a low-priority folder], that's fine and I get to it at *my* pleasure. On the other side of the coin, I'm not sure I like mailing lists much... I've been on a lot of them, from the very start [human-nets and such] and I have to say that I think that the usenet news machinery is a *FAR* better medium for many-to-many discussion forums. Email is probably OK for announcements, but I really prefer newsgroups for 'discussions' and if every 'discussion' mailing list I'm on went away and became a newsgroup, I'd think that'd be just fine and thing's be better for it... Offhand, I can't think of a persuasively good advantage of mailing lists over newsgroups... [authentication and access and such is a problem with usenet, not with newsgroups machinery... there's no real problem setting up 'private' newsgroups [just as you can have 'private' mailing lists].. you can even robomoderate to only allow 'registered' folk to post to the newsgroup [much like the way mailing lists only allow subscribed-folk to submit]]... [ps, as a side comment on what I think is the ultimate damnation of mailing lists as an effective medium, I see that the report chuq pointed us at recommended that ALL mailing lists have 'digest' available and that that be the *default*... sheesh... As I've said here, the continued existence (much less popularity) of digests are just an apologetic for bad mail-handling clients (showing how unsuitable 'email' _is_ for handling discussion forums) --- or if you will, the clearest indictment that mailing lists are mostly losers as the medium for a discussion forum. Digests should have died 20 years ago when their obvious shortcomings were apparent... /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 23 10:20:56 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA03804; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 10:11:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mds1.mastnet.net (unknown [206.65.193.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 923B817E8B for ; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 10:11:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 0d8xk (ppp-200.lake-jackson.mastnet.net [206.66.213.200]) by mds1.mastnet.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA16393 for ; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:16:46 -0500 From: "Alan S. Harrell" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:24:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: comments? Reply-To: ASHandRR@mastnet.net Message-ID: <39A3C285.6207.248A8B@localhost> In-reply-to: <200008231231.OAA06216@quill.thinkcoach.com> References: (message from Chuq Von Rospach on Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:23:36 -0700) X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 23 Aug 2000, 14:31, Norbert Bollow wrote: > I disagree here. Personal, one-on-one communication is done more > efficiently via the telephone. The big strengths of email are: Perhaps by you, but not by me. My strengths are in written communications. My weakness lies in verbal communication. > What is needed is not to replace mailing lists by such a > "communications control panel", but to improve email clients to > offer the functionality you want. I could agree with that. We need e-mail clients that allows one to render the received message in the manner that the recipient desires and not in the manner that the sender desires. Alan ASHandRR@MASTNET.net From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 23 11:14:22 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA04281; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 10:58:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ripco.com (pop2a.ripco.com [209.100.227.25]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B36B517E8B for ; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 10:57:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by ripco.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) id e7NIClu17953 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:12:47 -0500 (CDT) From: "David W. Tamkin" Message-Id: <200008231812.e7NIClu17953@ripco.com> Subject: Re: comments? Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:12:47 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: from "Chuq Von Rospach" at Aug 22, 2000 05:23:36 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chuq asked, | Any thoughts? The opening section and the "future of mailing lists" predictions were both stuck on the use of mailing lists for companies to send sales ads and the like to customers. Other sorts of announcement list got short shrift, and discussion lists were mentioned only in a separate context. So while Nielsen may be arguing that mailing lists are obsolescent for keeping one's customers informed of news from one's business, there are other uses for mailing lists that are not going away so readily. From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 06:17:50 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id GAA17254; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 06:00:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MAINE.maine.edu (maine.maine.edu [130.111.2.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id F07C017E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 05:59:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from polaris.umpi.maine.edu [130.111.208.87] by MAINE.maine.edu (IBM VM SMTP Level 310) via TCP with SMTP ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 09:13:45 EDT Received: from POLARIS/SpoolDir by polaris.umpi.maine.edu (Mercury 1.47); 24 Aug 00 08:11:15 -0500 Received: from SpoolDir by POLARIS (Mercury 1.47); 24 Aug 00 08:10:54 -0500 Received: from albert (130.111.208.178) by polaris.umpi.maine.edu (Mercury 1.47) with ESMTP; 24 Aug 00 08:10:44 -0500 From: "Anthony J. Albert" Organization: University of Maine at PI To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 09:10:43 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: comments? Message-ID: <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost> In-reply-to: <200008240800.BAA11715@honor.greatcircle.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 24 Aug 2000, at 1:00, List-Managers-Digest wrote: > > Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:48:41 -0400 > From: "Bernie Cosell" > Subject: Re: comments? > > On 23 Aug 2000, at 14:31, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > > I disagree here. Personal, one-on-one communication is done more > > efficiently via the telephone. The big strengths of email are: > [...] > > Actually, looking at email from a long term perspective, email has always > been, and I suspect always will be, probably the best means of one-on-one > communication. If anything, I think the telephone will start to go by > the wayside as things continue --- Truly symmetric telephone calls are > rare --- as a rule, one party was looking for the other, and that other > may or may not wish to deal with the first party *right*then* [but you > hardly have a choice if they manage to catch you, do you?]. Requires > that the called-party be findable. That the parties want to talk at the > same time [which isn't such a slam-dunk when one is in Hawaii and the > other in Berlin]. > > Some of the *biggest* wins of email, as sort of the killer-app of the > early ARPAnet, was [and for *one*on*one* communication, and, IMO, still > is and will be]: > > 1) it was fast. Just a minute or so from anywhere to anywhere else -- > not so for mailing lists, where this one (list-mgrs), for example, seems > to have a one or two hour delay built in, and most incur some sort of > delay --- but one-on-one is, generally, seconds-in-transit > > 2) it eliminated time sync/zone considerations --- folks in europe > could send email to us and we'd get it when we got in in the morning... > we would send replies and they'd get it at the start of [their] next day, > 3am or so our time, etc]. for the first time, the night-crew [the guys > who'd come in at 4PM and work 'till sunup] could actually constructively > exchange info with the day-folk... > > 3) it eliminated the problem of figuring out where someone was. > Generally, telephones only work if you know the number where the person > happens to be at that moment [not actually true now, with folks able to > have national-roaming cell phones, but few ordinary folk have such toys]. > But for email, a person could be on a trip or at a conference or even on > vacation, and get your message and reply to it with little or no delay... > no need for the "while you were out" message to sit on your desk for 14 > days... > > 4) It allowed reasonable time management... Telephones are incredibly > intrusive. I'm pretty disciplined and if I'm busy I just let the thing > ring, but that drives my wife *insane*... as a rule, if you call me I > was almost certainly doing something else and whether I am happy talking > to you or not, the fact is that you interrupted me... with email, it > just waits until I feel like messing with it and if I'm busy and can't > get to 'routine correspondence' [much less 'random hobby-mailing-list' > traffic, which is ghettoed off into a low-priority folder], that's fine > and I get to it at *my* pleasure. > > > > On the other side of the coin, I'm not sure I like mailing lists much... > I've been on a lot of them, from the very start [human-nets and such] and > I have to say that I think that the usenet news machinery is a *FAR* > better medium for many-to-many discussion forums. Email is probably OK > for announcements, but I really prefer newsgroups for 'discussions' and > if every 'discussion' mailing list I'm on went away and became a > newsgroup, I'd think that'd be just fine and thing's be better for it... > Offhand, I can't think of a persuasively good advantage of mailing lists > over newsgroups... [authentication and access and such is a problem with > usenet, not with newsgroups machinery... there's no real problem setting > up 'private' newsgroups [just as you can have 'private' mailing lists].. > you can even robomoderate to only allow 'registered' folk to post to the > newsgroup [much like the way mailing lists only allow subscribed-folk to > submit]]... > > > [ps, as a side comment on what I think is the ultimate damnation of > mailing lists as an effective medium, I see that the report chuq pointed > us at recommended that ALL mailing lists have 'digest' available and that > that be the *default*... sheesh... As I've said here, the continued > existence (much less popularity) of digests are just an apologetic for > bad mail-handling clients (showing how unsuitable 'email' _is_ for > handling discussion forums) --- or if you will, the clearest indictment > that mailing lists are mostly losers as the medium for a discussion > forum. Digests should have died 20 years ago when their obvious > shortcomings were apparent... > > /Bernie\ > - -- > Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers > mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA > --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- Dear Bernie, I agree with you on your first four points, in your letter, above, but I must wholeheartedly disagree on the last two, those being the paragraph about newsgroups, and your post script. Newsgroups are superior, in some aspects, to mailing lists, for discussion purposes. But out of the two dozen or so mailing lists that I'm on, the first dozen are announcement only, and only about six of the rest, I'd judge, would be suitable for conversion to newsgroups. My biggest argument against newsgroups for every discussion is the waste of it. Every newsgroup that is carried on an international basis must be carried on every news server that is hosting these groups. (Admittedly, there are all sorts of ways to set up local- distribution groups only, but this defeats the purpose of having a widely-based group.) That adds up to a lot of storage used for just the benefit of a very few. Newsgroups have their place, and there are some that I rely on heavily for technical support forums, and many others that I cruise sheerly for the pleasure. But mailing lists, I find, can be every bit as good for free-form discussion, and are less likely to wander off topic. But, as far as digest forms are concerned, I use them extensively, and while I don't advocate them as default (except perhaps in certain, very-high-traffic lists), they are certainly very useful. I get this "List Managers" list in digest form, and it's much easier and more convienient to read it all in one packet, on a daily basis. Admittedly, there are problems with HTML-formatted email in digest form, and with attachments, but by and large, I don't care for those in my regular email, anyway, so I'm not complaining on those issues. :) Sincerely, Anthony J. Albert ============================================================== Anthony J. Albert albert@polaris.umpi.maine.edu Systems and Software Support Specialist Postmaster Computer Services - University of Maine, Presque Isle Attention: the next meeting of the Time Travellers' Society will be last Tuesday. From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 10:32:04 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA19694; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:13:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 49D7D17E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:13:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 5322 invoked by uid 100); 24 Aug 2000 13:28:32 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:28:30 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: "Anthony J. Albert" Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: comments? In-Reply-To: <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >> I have to say that I think that the usenet news machinery is a *FAR* >> better medium for many-to-many discussion forums. > My biggest argument against newsgroups for every discussion is > the waste of it. Every newsgroup that is carried on an international > basis must be carried on every news server that is hosting these > groups. I can't see that as much of a problem. There are two rather different ways you can use usenet software. One is the traditional approach used for the well known groups like comp.whatever, sending usenet traffic to a bazillion servers all over the world. The other is private groups on one server or, if traffic merits, a few servers. I've moderated comp.compilers for a long time, and it's doubtless sent to 100,000 servers all over the world. But there are a lot more than 100,000 readers, so the total number of copies stored is considerably less than if each message landed in everyone's mailbox. This is the case for pretty much every traditional newsgroup I can think of. For private newsgroups, the savings are even more extensive. > But, as far as digest forms are concerned, I use them extensively, I send my high-volume mailing lists through a home-brewed gateway to my news server and read them as news, no digest needed or wanted. (Indeed, for a few lists that only arrive as digests I explode them back to individual messages.) Digests are a poor substitute for newsgroup software. As an added benefit, my local users can tag along and read the lists I have there without having to subscribe separately and without having to transmit and store separate copies over the net. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 11:17:04 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA20116; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:58:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pug.qqx.org (pug.qqx.org [169.207.160.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4021D17E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:58:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from faboo.qqx.org (faboo.qqx.org [169.207.53.196] (may be forged)) by pug.qqx.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.17) with ESMTP id NAA02572 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:13:01 -0500 Received: by faboo.qqx.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 9709BF828; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:13:00 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:13:00 -0500 From: Aaron Schrab To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: comments? Message-ID: <20000824131300.T11870@pug.qqx.org> Mail-Followup-To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM References: <200008240800.BAA11715@honor.greatcircle.com> <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.5i In-Reply-To: <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost>; from albert@polaris.umpi.maine.edu on Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 09:10:43AM -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 09:10 -0400 24 Aug 2000, "Anthony J. Albert" wrote: > Admittedly, there are problems with HTML-formatted email in > digest form, and with attachments, but by and large, I don't care for > those in my regular email, anyway, so I'm not complaining on > those issues. :) There are also problems with threading. Both with your mailer being able to properly thread messages (which isn't really an issue if your mailer doesn't do threading anyway), and with it being able to include the necessary information in replies that you send to allow other people's mailers to do threading. -- Aaron Schrab aaron@schrab.com http://www.execpc.com/~aarons/ Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 11:30:20 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA20024; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:47:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.rev.net (mail.rev.net [206.67.68.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A77C17E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:47:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from admin3 (admin3.rev.net [12.26.100.205]) by mail.rev.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e7OI2R211310 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:02:27 -0400 Message-Id: <200008241802.e7OI2R211310@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:02:26 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: comments? Reply-To: bernie@fantasyfarm.com In-reply-to: <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost> References: <200008240800.BAA11715@honor.greatcircle.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 24 Aug 00, at 9:10, Anthony J. Albert wrote: > Newsgroups are superior, in some aspects, to mailing lists, for > discussion purposes. But out of the two dozen or so mailing lists > that I'm on, the first dozen are announcement only, and only about > six of the rest, I'd judge, would be suitable for conversion to > newsgroups. > > My biggest argument against newsgroups for every discussion is > the waste of it. Every newsgroup that is carried on an international > basis must be carried on every news server that is hosting these > groups. Not true. Anyone can run a news server. Microsoft has a whole pile of 'private' newsgroups. The Zone-Labs folk provide tech discussion/support via privately run newsgroups... That's why I distinguished 'usenet' from 'newsgroups'. You don't need to propagate a newsgroup anywhere or if you do, you can arrange [with the other sysops] exactly where a particular newsgroup will/can propagate. Also means you don't have to worry about the 'rules' for usenet --- if you're running a private newsgroup, you can just create it, no need for fancy-charters on news.announce or debates on alt.config or the like... You can also restrict who has access to the newsgroups, who has posting permission, etc... > But, as far as digest forms are concerned, I use them extensively, > and while I don't advocate them as default (except perhaps in > certain, very-high-traffic lists), they are certainly very useful. I get > this "List Managers" list in digest form, and it's much easier and > more convienient to read it all in one packet, on a daily basis. Why is that? I just have my mail client stuff all the list-managers incoming email into a folder and mostly forget about it. If I feel like dealing with l-m, I do -- if that's twice a day, I get to read it twice a day (regardless of how the MLM feels like bunding digests). If it's once in two days, that's fine, too. And of course the messages are all sorted by thread (and regardless of how the particular messages 'sync' with the digest-maker). And indeed, if you're particularly interested in a specific thread, you can easily set up your filters to flag the particular thread as it comes in [even as it is quietly squirreling away the rest of the traffic on that list into your side-folder] and so stay abreast of the one thing that piqued your interest as it unfolds, even as the other chatter on the list goes into the folder for later digestion at your leisure. I always ask digest-fans simple questions [things that you can just take for granted if you handle a mailing list using your email client]: Does your mail client actually SORT the digest by thread? everyone one I've ever seen just presents the 'day's messages' as a sequential jumble.. Can you 'skip to the next reply in this tread', can you 'ignore this thread and go on to the next', can you "kill this thread" entirely so its subsequent followups don't keep getting in your way? And if you get a digest or two behind, can you follow threads easily from one digest to the next? Can you easily reply to one message in the middle of a digest? If you want to save someones pearl-of-wisdom, can you easily store-away in an archive just the message you want [and will it have the right author/subject so you'll know why you saved it when you see it in your archive folder six months later?] There are some mail clients that will locally-burst a digest so that it becomes-again individual messages [which you can then sort, file, archive, filter, etc], but most mail clients won't [and indeed, many MLMs don't even present digests in a rationally burstable format]. And even if yours does, what's the advantage of having bothered with a digest ANYWAY? -- You have a clumsy way to end up with 80 messages in a side-folder, which is just what you'd have had anyway without digest mode... I'm sorry, but I'm firmly anti-digest -- as I say, it evolved a LONG time ago, in an era when mail clients were pretty simple and fancy filtering and folder management and thread following and the like weren't readily available. But with just about any modern mail client, I don't see any utility in using 'digests'. /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 11:44:44 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA20398; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:24:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C312417E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:24:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.211] (A17-216-27-211.apple.com [17.216.27.211]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA20750 ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:45:36 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost> References: <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:38:37 -0700 To: "Anthony J. Albert" , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: comments? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 9:10 AM -0400 8/24/00, Anthony J. Albert wrote: > >Newsgroups are superior, in some aspects, to mailing lists, for >discussion purposes. But out of the two dozen or so mailing lists >that I'm on, the first dozen are announcement only, and only about >six of the rest, I'd judge, would be suitable for conversion to >newsgroups. e-mail is a technology designed for one to one communication. It's great for that. The problem is that you can overwhelm a user's email easily -- email doesn't scale all that well to volume. Yes, there are tools to make it more manageable, but not all users are skilled in them, and not all want to be -- and everyone has different limits where they start drowning. mail lists exist because, basically, back when all this started, email was pretty much the only interactive technology, and when all you have are hammers, everything starts looking like a nail. it works -- but it doesn't scale. Hence the various things people have tried to do to make email scalable, including digests (which, admittedly, is a hack, but it's a hack that WORKS). I view mail lists as trying to have a discussion with people using beepers. It works, but it's really intrusive, and it doesn't take too many people or too many messages to get to the point where it's driving you crazy. And if you look at the history of development of MLM and how lists are managed, that seems to be a fairly good analogy, because busy lists tend to get split or have constant fights over content/volume. mail lists are great for relatively small, relatively quiet content groups, and the bigger they get, the busier they get, the more problems they have, and the more the list and admin have to focus and/or manage and/or split the content. newsgroups are better at many to many discussions, but have other flaws. Or perhaps I ought to tweak that a bit. NNTP is a great technology. USENET is a horribly flawed implementation of that technology. But that's a different list... But as far as email's concerned, the further you get away from that one to one conversation, the more you torque the technology into things it wasn't really designed for. email is like a telephone or beeper -- it is, inherently, a personal, push, invasive technology, because when I send you e-mail, there's a good chance it's going to interrupt what you're doing, to a lesser or greater extent. newsgroups are more passive -- you go TO them, when YOU want. email comes and invades your space. That's why there's a lot less tolerance of spam and junk email than there is over on usenet, just like there's a lot less tolerance of telemarketers jumping you at dinner than there is guys standing outside the mall... That's why, ultimately, I think discussion content is going to move away from email. Because email has to get back to the telephone/beeper paradigm, and discussion content shows up in a way other, more passive, ways. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 12:55:42 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA20898; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:04:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AD4317E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:04:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.216.27.211] (A17-216-27-211.apple.com [17.216.27.211]) by public.lists.apple.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA30312 ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:25:33 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20000824131300.T11870@pug.qqx.org> References: <200008240800.BAA11715@honor.greatcircle.com> <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost> <20000824131300.T11870@pug.qqx.org> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:18:52 -0700 To: Aaron Schrab , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: comments? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 1:13 PM -0500 8/24/00, Aaron Schrab wrote: >There are also problems with threading. But -- on systems I've done where threading exists, I've found most people hate it. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 13:00:14 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA21228; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:32:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ma-1.rootsweb.com (ma-1.rootsweb.com [209.192.148.153]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02BB217E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:32:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from twp@localhost) by ma-1.rootsweb.com (8.10.0.Beta10/8.10.0.Beta10) id e7OJlFI15529; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 15:47:15 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 15:47:15 -0400 From: Tim Pierce To: "Anthony J. Albert" Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: comments? Message-ID: <20000824154715.E789@ma-1.rootsweb.com> References: <200008240800.BAA11715@honor.greatcircle.com> <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.7us In-Reply-To: <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 09:10:43AM -0400, Anthony J. Albert wrote: > > Newsgroups are superior, in some aspects, to mailing lists, for > discussion purposes. But out of the two dozen or so mailing lists > that I'm on, the first dozen are announcement only, and only about > six of the rest, I'd judge, would be suitable for conversion to > newsgroups. > > My biggest argument against newsgroups for every discussion is > the waste of it. Every newsgroup that is carried on an international > basis must be carried on every news server that is hosting these > groups. (Admittedly, there are all sorts of ways to set up local- > distribution groups only, but this defeats the purpose of having a > widely-based group.) That adds up to a lot of storage used for just > the benefit of a very few. It's useful to distinguish between netnews technology and current netnews implementation. The easy (lazy) way to set up a newsgroup is to create it on the global Usenet and let most of the servers pick it up. But there is nothing inherent in the technology that requires that; you could just as easily create a newsgroup and only propagate it to a few other sites. Netnews would still be useful if it were used more often to manage limited-distribution groups like this. Brian Kantor has said at least once that the intention of NNTP was to replace, not supplant, mailing lists. It's kind of depressing that we've been going backward since 1987. -- Regards, Tim Pierce RootsWeb.com lead system admonsterator and Chief Hacking Officer From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 14:41:07 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA22288; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:58:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wellington.cnchost.com (wellington.concentric.net [207.155.252.14]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AE0717E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:58:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from escallop ([204.217.159.3]) by wellington.cnchost.com id RAA27190; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:13:21 -0400 (EDT) [ConcentricHost SMTP Relay 1.8] Message-ID: <200008242113.RAA27190@wellington.cnchost.com> From: "Jim Trigg / Blaise de Cormeilles" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:13:15 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: comments? In-reply-to: <200008241802.e7OI2R211310@mail.rev.net> References: <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 24 Aug 00, at 14:02, Bernie Cosell wrote: > On 24 Aug 00, at 9:10, Anthony J. Albert wrote: > > > Newsgroups are superior, in some aspects, to mailing lists, for > > discussion purposes. But out of the two dozen or so mailing lists > > that I'm on, the first dozen are announcement only, and only about > > six of the rest, I'd judge, would be suitable for conversion to > > newsgroups. > > > > My biggest argument against newsgroups for every discussion is the > > waste of it. Every newsgroup that is carried on an international > > basis must be carried on every news server that is hosting these > > groups. > > Not true. Anyone can run a news server. Microsoft has a whole pile > of 'private' newsgroups. The Zone-Labs folk provide tech > discussion/support via privately run newsgroups... That's why I > distinguished 'usenet' from 'newsgroups'. You don't need to propagate > a newsgroup anywhere or if you do, you can arrange [with the other > sysops] exactly where a particular newsgroup will/can propagate. > > Also means you don't have to worry about the 'rules' for usenet --- if > you're running a private newsgroup, you can just create it, no need > for fancy-charters on news.announce or debates on alt.config or the > like... You can also restrict who has access to the newsgroups, who > has posting permission, etc... That's true, but what mailing lists can do that newsgroups cannot is restrict access/posting permission on a *list by list* basis. AFAIK, all available news server software is on an all-or-nothing basis. Jim Trigg From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 15:11:00 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA22783; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:41:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C45E117E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:41:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 10222 invoked by uid 100); 24 Aug 2000 17:56:28 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:56:28 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Chuq Von Rospach Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: comments? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > But -- on systems I've done where threading exists, I've found most > people hate it. Really? Usenet users love it, the biggest complaint about certain brands of news readers is that there's no threading. This may be because usenet software tends to be pickier than mail software about geting headers right, so the threads work better. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 16:00:03 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA23329; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 15:32:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pug.qqx.org (pug.qqx.org [169.207.160.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E56E717E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 15:32:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from faboo.qqx.org (faboo.qqx.org [169.207.1.11]) by pug.qqx.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.17) with ESMTP id RAA04891 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:47:44 -0500 Received: by faboo.qqx.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 4D2E9F828; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:47:44 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:47:44 -0500 From: Aaron Schrab To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: comments? Message-ID: <20000824174744.W11870@pug.qqx.org> Mail-Followup-To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM References: <200008240800.BAA11715@honor.greatcircle.com> <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost> <20000824131300.T11870@pug.qqx.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.5i In-Reply-To: ; from chuqui@plaidworks.com on Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 12:18:52PM -0700 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:18 -0700 24 Aug 2000, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > But -- on systems I've done where threading exists, I've found most > people hate it. That's fine. If people don't want to use threading (although I think that's quite strange) that's their choice. All the mailers that I'm familiar with that do threading (alright, so that's just mutt) even make it optional. But, that doesn't mean that the information necessary shouldn't be provided so that people who do want to have messages threaded also have the choice. -- Aaron Schrab aaron@schrab.com http://www.execpc.com/~aarons/ You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted and used against you. From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 16:18:44 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA23594; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:00:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2E4717E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:00:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e7ONEIH26605; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:14:19 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:05:37 -0700 To: John R Levine , Chuq Von Rospach From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: comments? Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 5:56 PM -0400 8/24/00, John R Levine wrote: > > But -- on systems I've done where threading exists, I've found most >> people hate it. > >Really? Usenet users love it, the biggest complaint about certain brands >of news readers is that there's no threading. yeah. I don't know if it's because they don't like threading, the threading implementations aren't good, or they don't understand (aka aren't used to) threading. It's one of those things I've always wanted to study, but it's real low priority. >This may be because usenet software tends to be pickier than mail >software about geting headers right, so the threads work better. very possible... -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 16:30:39 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA23719; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:12:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF72217E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:11:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e7ONPaH26779; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:25:37 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200008242113.RAA27190@wellington.cnchost.com> References: <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost> <200008242113.RAA27190@wellington.cnchost.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:19:45 -0700 To: "Jim Trigg / Blaise de Cormeilles" , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: comments? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > >That's true, but what mailing lists can do that newsgroups cannot is >restrict access/posting permission on a *list by list* basis. AFAIK, >all available news server software is on an all-or-nothing basis. > Not true -- it's fairly easy to restrict posting, actually, at least with traditional spool situations. you simply use group permissions in the directory structure. Now, with modern versions of INN and the cycbuff stuff, I don't know offhand how easy this is to do, but if what you're doing is setting up restricted access for local groups or internal stuff, it's easy to use traditional spool for those groups. You can even set up (literally) private hierarchies and sub-hierarchies by restricting access to the directory structure completely. Very useful in some circumstances. -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 17:01:21 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA23909; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:34:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivan.iecc.com (ivan.iecc.com [208.31.42.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1672717E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:34:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 11995 invoked by uid 100); 24 Aug 2000 19:49:04 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 19:49:04 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Jim Trigg / Blaise de Cormeilles Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: comments? In-Reply-To: <200008242113.RAA27190@wellington.cnchost.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > That's true, but what mailing lists can do that newsgroups cannot is > restrict access/posting permission on a *list by list* basis. AFAIK, > all available news server software is on an all-or-nothing basis. Not at all. If you set your newsgroups to moderated, you can apply any posting rules you want. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 24 18:05:18 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id RAA24539; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:43:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from windlord.stanford.edu (windlord.Stanford.EDU [171.64.12.23]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3887C17E8B for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:43:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 26357 invoked by uid 50); 25 Aug 2000 00:58:48 -0000 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: comments? References: <39A4E693.21326.360FE4@localhost> <200008242113.RAA27190@wellington.cnchost.com> In-Reply-To: "Jim Trigg / Blaise de Cormeilles"'s message of "Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:13:15 -0400" From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: 24 Aug 2000 17:58:48 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 27 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Jim Trigg / Blaise de Cormeilles writes: > That's true, but what mailing lists can do that newsgroups cannot is > restrict access/posting permission on a *list by list* basis. AFAIK, > all available news server software is on an all-or-nothing basis. INN hasn't been all-or-nothing for eons, certainly since I've been running news. You've pretty much always had the ability to bang out wildmat patterns in nnrp.access for groups those people shouldn't have access to. INN 2.3.0, the current version, has a completely new authentication and authorization front-end that gives you all the flexibility you need to do basically anything you want, up to and including an embedded Perl interpretor so that if you want you can write your own custom authorization functions that return precisely what newsgroups a given client is permitted to access and under the hood can generate that list via any means you wish. Someone's already hooked this up to LDAP, although the code hasn't been rolled into the main distribution. The power is all there; what's not there is the polish. This is unfortunately true of INN in general, and is something that various people are working on fixing, if slowly. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 26 08:10:41 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA19705; Sat, 26 Aug 2000 07:46:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stinson.amys-answers.com (amys-answers.com [205.160.203.108]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id F1F4717E8C for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2000 07:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from famroom [205.161.197.99] by stinson.amys-answers.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-4.07) id A7CE3D21022C; Sat, 26 Aug 2000 10:01:02 PDT From: "Amy Stinson" Organization: Amy's Answers To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 09:57:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: list content copyright Reply-To: amys@amys-answers.com Message-ID: <39A79496.17943.4E87486@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk List Members, I'm sure this has been discussed ad nauseam over the years, and I have been plowing through the archives to get an answer from the past, but due to time constraints I'm going to post the question: Who owns the posted content of a list? Thanks, Amy From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 26 10:17:40 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA20802; Sat, 26 Aug 2000 09:52:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DB6A17E8C for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2000 09:52:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.239.169.197] (a197.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.197]) by plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e7QH6KH05302; Sat, 26 Aug 2000 10:06:21 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <39A79496.17943.4E87486@localhost> References: <39A79496.17943.4E87486@localhost> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 10:04:48 -0700 To: amys@amys-answers.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: list content copyright Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 9:57 AM -0500 8/26/00, Amy Stinson wrote: >Who owns the posted content of a list? At a 10,000 foot level, I think there's more or less general consensus that the original poster owns copyright of their message, but the list owner can assert a copyright on the compilation of postings that make up the list. That would mean the poster has say how any individual message can be re-used (keeping in mind the tenets of fair use, of course), while the list owner has the say in how the list content in aggregate is used. Now, what this can mean in terms of who can do what to which and who has to giver permission for this or that, it gets complicated fast. If there's any question about what is or isn't acceptable or people are getting snarly at each other over stuff, it's really a good idea to spell out what the list policies are up front in the list documentation and not wait until the fight starts to try to hash it out. Of course, I'm guessing that since this has popped up on list-managers, chances are it's too late for that... -- Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com) Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com) And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'" From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 26 13:39:41 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA22594; Sat, 26 Aug 2000 13:11:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stinson.amys-answers.com (amys-answers.com [205.160.203.108]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id F0AB617EB1 for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2000 13:11:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from famroom [205.161.197.99] by stinson.amys-answers.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-4.07) id A42FCCAB0202; Sat, 26 Aug 2000 15:26:55 PDT From: "Amy Stinson" Organization: Amy's Answers To: Chuq Von Rospach , list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 15:23:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: list content copyright Reply-To: amys@amys-answers.com Message-ID: <39A7E0FC.26274.612BEE1@localhost> In-reply-to: References: <39A79496.17943.4E87486@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Actually, I had spelled it out a few years ago in the welcome and had pretty much said it like you did. Some did not like the idea that I had *any* claim at all, even tho by staying on they agreed. Then I pointed out that eGroups pretty much owns the content, also, and that signing on was an agreement. Showed them chapter and verse. Shut them up. > At a 10,000 foot level, I think there's more or less general > consensus that the original poster owns copyright of their message, > but the list owner can assert a copyright on the compilation of > postings that make up the list. That would mean the poster has say how > any individual message can be re-used (keeping in mind the tenets of > fair use, of course), while the list owner has the say in how the list > content in aggregate is used. From list-managers-owner Sun Aug 27 06:43:24 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id GAA03784; Sun, 27 Aug 2000 06:09:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from karat.cip.informatik.uni-muenchen.de (karat.cip.informatik.uni-muenchen.de [141.84.220.26]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3070F17E8B for ; Sun, 27 Aug 2000 06:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (zimmerma@localhost) by karat.cip.informatik.uni-muenchen.de (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA24236 for ; Sun, 27 Aug 2000 15:25:12 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: karat.cip.informatik.uni-muenchen.de: zimmerma owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 15:25:12 +0200 (MET DST) From: Alexander Zimmermann To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Looking for a new home for my (majordomo-based) mailinglists Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, I looking for a new home for my (majordomo-based) mailinglists - any help would be appreciated. Let me explain a little bit more about them and why it appears to me to be so difficult to find one that I turn to you: Those lists were originally based on university server I had root access on and the permission to host my own majordomo. I took over the whole administration of the majordomo and contributed even to the administration of the server. But everything changes and after over two years I left the university they have shut down the server. There are currently twelve lists which are all small (the largest has 23 subscribers), low-volume (here the largest generates about a dozen mails on average) with recreational topics (ranging from roleplaying to when we meet in a certain diner). I've spent the last two months looking for a new home for them and the only thing I found was flop: Based on a domain now owned by me, they let me know that I'd have to pay the price they gave me for the majordomo for each list (about 2.50$ per month). The domain come for about 10$ per month (at least here in Germany one of the more expensive domain hostings) and now they want me to shell out thrice that amount for the lists. I'm more then willing to spend a few "bucks" on my hobbies - I think there should be corners of the internet which are ad-free and allow somebody else to pursue their hobbies, but I know also that not everything in life comes for free. But not willing to pay excessive prices for something that still is simply fun. So, I'm looking for any hints, ideas and suggestions of how to find a new home for those lists (or even better together with my domain), a home where I don't get riped off for wanting something nobody else cares to offer. P.S. The sad part of the whole story is that those from the hosting service in my eyes simply have no clue. For example, I sent them the config files from my old lists to make their work easier. But they simply reject the config files claiming there _might_ be compatibility problems between Majordomo 1.94.3 (their version) and 1.94.4 (my version). Even after mailing them the changelog they insisted on their claim. I think they're some of those "let's get rich by doing some of this internet stuff!"-types who think they've found a particular stupid idiot willing to pay them endless fortunes for nothing. Alex -- Alexander Zimmermann http://www.madalex.net/ From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 28 09:27:33 2000 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id IAA19330; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:59:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from janus.hosting4u.net (janus.hosting4u.net [209.15.2.37]) by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 10F1617E8B for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:59:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 1643 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2000 16:14:49 -0000 Received: from virgo.hosting4u.net (HELO danebytes.com) (209.15.2.55) by mail-gate.hosting4u.net with SMTP; 28 Aug 2000 16:14:49 -0000 Received: from ruby ([207.36.137.115]) by danebytes.com ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:14:45 -0500 Message-Id: <4.2.2.20000828121834.00afc950@danebytes.com> X-Sender: ruby@danebytes.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 12:20:10 -0400 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Ruby Subject: Re:Looking for a new home for my (majordomo-based) mailinglists In-Reply-To: <200008280800.BAA12388@honor.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk http://www.i-development.net email Chuck Flynn from that site, he will help you. Tell him Ruby sent you. Ruby >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 15:25:12 +0200 (MET DST) >From: Alexander Zimmermann >Subject: Looking for a new home for my (majordomo-based) mailinglists > >Hi, > >I looking for a new home for my (majordomo-based) mailinglists - any help >would be appreciated.