moving the list

>We've got to get off of this place. Carl is about ready to leave,
>and I don't blame him. If you don't want to do it, I wonder if
>anyone else would be able to?
>

Alright, I'll try to set it up this week, we'll start as a parallel list,
and then see how many/if people migrate.

I must say though, for a list with 400+ people on it, I've only heard from
4 or 5 on this idea. . . . . but hey, it's worth a try, and probably won't
be too much work on my part.

cb

--- In tuning@y..., Christopher Bailey <cb202@c...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_36144.html#36144

> >We've got to get off of this place. Carl is about ready to leave,
> >and I don't blame him. If you don't want to do it, I wonder if
> >anyone else would be able to?
> >
>
> Alright, I'll try to set it up this week, we'll start as a parallel
list,
> and then see how many/if people migrate.
>
> I must say though, for a list with 400+ people on it, I've only
heard from
> 4 or 5 on this idea. . . . . but hey, it's worth a try, and
probably won't
> be too much work on my part.
>
> cb

***It may end up, Chris, that only the four or five people post over
there... but, hey, maybe you'll have better luck.

Good fishin'

jp

>>I must say though, for a list with 400+ people on it, I've only
>>heard from 4 or 5 on this idea. . . . . but hey, it's worth a
>>try, and probably won't be too much work on my part.
>>
>> cb
>
>***It may end up, Chris, that only the four or five people post
>over there... but, hey, maybe you'll have better luck.

If it's the right 4 or 5, he may get 90% of the traffic here. :)

Anywho, Joe and others, I strongly recommend a cruise through
the members area. The corporate groups thing may not be
swelling our ranks at all -- instead just reporting inflated
numbers.

Is Mark Nowitsky still on the list?

-Carl

--- In tuning@y..., Christopher Bailey <cb202@c...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_36144.html#36144

> >We've got to get off of this place. Carl is about ready to leave,
> >and I don't blame him. If you don't want to do it, I wonder if
> >anyone else would be able to?
> >
>
> Alright, I'll try to set it up this week, we'll start as a parallel
list,
> and then see how many/if people migrate.
>
> I must say though, for a list with 400+ people on it, I've only
heard from
> 4 or 5 on this idea. . . . . but hey, it's worth a try, and
probably won't
> be too much work on my part.
>
> cb

***Hi Chris!

Would the new list have a Web interface?? I'm afraid that might have
an impact on my own *personal* involvement...

Thanks!

Joseph

--- In tuning@y..., "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> Would the new list have a Web interface??

I sincerely hope *not*.

> I'm afraid that might have an impact on my own *personal*
> involvement...

I sincerely hope *not*!

Joe, almost every problem about this list, in the last couple of
years, can be directly tied to the fact that it has become 'web-
based' (even though I still get it in email form). Advertisements,
downtime on overloaded servers (which *could* happen on a listserv,
but unlikely), privacy concerns, etc.

All this list is is text on a screen and occasional files to
download. All you need for that is a basic email program, and it will
do it a lot faster. The webface has been the bane of this list, and I
hope it goes away; this is not retro-think, this is simply using the
right tool for the job.

Cheers,
Jon

Yes, there will be web.

Yes, there will be threading and thread-based searching.

As far as my sysadmin informed me, it's basically the same as Yahoo,
except no ads.

cb

Re Joe P's anxious concerns, Jon Sz wrote:

>> Would the new list have a Web interface??
>
> I sincerely hope *not*.

and Christopher Bailey wrote:

> Yes, there will be web.

Hmm, with the information that it's a majordomo list server, I would guess
that means they're using "MajorCool" for a front-end web interface.

From the site http://www.conveyanced.com/MajorCool we learn "MajorCool
puts a friendly face on top of the Majordomo list management processes"
which kind of makes me shudder, in the same vein as "it's like a friendly
buddy to help you while you surf the web". (Not to mention it's a silly
name.)

But as long as it keeps the webbiness hidden from those of us who access
email via (superior) text-only means, I don't think the existence of a web
interface will be inherently damaging to the list.

Fire 'er up Chris!

--- In tuning@y..., "jonszanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_36144.html#36168

> --- In tuning@y..., "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> > Would the new list have a Web interface??
>
> I sincerely hope *not*.
>
> > I'm afraid that might have an impact on my own *personal*
> > involvement...
>
> I sincerely hope *not*!
>
> Joe, almost every problem about this list, in the last couple of
> years, can be directly tied to the fact that it has become 'web-
> based' (even though I still get it in email form). Advertisements,
> downtime on overloaded servers (which *could* happen on a listserv,
> but unlikely), privacy concerns, etc.
>
> All this list is is text on a screen and occasional files to
> download. All you need for that is a basic email program, and it
will
> do it a lot faster. The webface has been the bane of this list, and
I
> hope it goes away; this is not retro-think, this is simply using
the
> right tool for the job.
>
> Cheers,
> Jon

***Well, sorry, Jon, but I *love* the Web interface, especially for
the ability to link to the archives. I like using "Hotmail" too, for
most of my e-mail activities, since I can get it from everyplace, and
it doesn't have the "routing" possibilities of MS Outlook Express.

I guess I have as much a right to decide whether to continue as
*anybody...* :)

jp

--- In tuning@y..., Christopher Bailey <cb202@c...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_36144.html#36169

>
> Yes, there will be web.
>
> Yes, there will be threading and thread-based searching.
>
> As far as my sysadmin informed me, it's basically the same as Yahoo,
> except no ads.
>
> cb

***Thanks, Chris! Sounds good! I like the "threading" idea too.

So, Jon, you can relax, I'll probably be around to pester you for
awhile... :)

jp

--- In tuning@y..., "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_36144.html#36171

I like using "Hotmail" too, for
> most of my e-mail activities, since I can get it from everyplace,
and it doesn't have the "routing" possibilities of MS Outlook Express.
>

***Umm, I just noticed that Hotmail *does* have some provision
for "routing" e-mail.

Learn something every day... ;)

jp

--- In tuning@y..., jon wild <wild@f...> wrote:
> But as long as it keeps the webbiness hidden from those of us
> who access email via (superior) text-only means, I don't think
> the existence of a web interface will be inherently damaging to
> the list.

Splendidly put, Jon, and not just because we share first names!

> Fire 'er up Chris!

Agreed.

Cheers,
Jon

>Joe, almost every problem about this list, in the last couple of
>years, can be directly tied to the fact that it has become 'web-
>based'

Can be directly related to the fact that it commercially-operated.

The web interface can do things that e-mail can not, like threading,
and more.

-Carl

--- In tuning@y..., Carl Lumma <carl@l...> wrote:
> >Joe, almost every problem about this list, in the last couple of
> >years, can be directly tied to the fact that it has become 'web-
> >based'
>
> Can be directly related to the fact that it commercially-operated.

Yes, Carl, that is pretty much 99% true; I was thinking Web with the capital "W" as opposed to Tim Berners-Lee's wonderful creation. Maybe it should be $$$.yahoo.com?

> The web interface can do things that e-mail can not, like threading,
> and more.

If a w-gui can be put on a mailing list, that is great, and I would be happy for those that would use it in that way. Threading is mostly contained in intelligent use of subject headers, and none of this is as fast or efficient as email (as in a listserv).

But, everyone is different, and has their preferences. For me, text communication is still best handled in an email program...

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@y..., "jonszanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_36144.html#36187

>> But, everyone is different, and has their preferences. For me,
text communication is still best handled in an email program...
>
> Cheers,
> Jon

***Hi Jon!

I guess I'll have to agree with you as far as *e-mail* itself is
concerned. I was looking forward to using HTML in Hotmail, since I
could change the "pretty colors" and spell check, etc., etc.
However, I noticed that when I sent an e-mail in HTML, or somebody
sent one to *me*, on the reply the original text wasn't included in
the messages, when I was set to HTML setting!

So, it would be difficult to "quote" without *copying* the entire
message from the original and dumping it into my "reply" screen.

So, until they get that little "quirk" straightened out, I'm staying
with *plain* rather than HTML text for "normal" e-mails!

(Slightly OT. I suppose more on Metatuning...)

best,

Joe