> Why is it that the JMDL sticks to the antiquated listerserv type e-mail > list? A group of people could easily go through a server such as > egroups-- > but I think an almost better move would be some sort of bulletin > board. For > example http://www.atforumz.com is a board specifically form Tori Amos > fans-- and yet has all sorts of sections for discussing non-Tori related > information, etc. etc. etc. > > To make the JMDL work-- I've had to specifically format my Outlook so that > posts are separeated from general e-mail. It seems like so much hassle. > Perhaps this discussion has already taken place before I found the JMDL. A big reason to use e-mail is that you can batch the download of messages. i.e. if I dial up four times a day to pick up my e-mail, with calls of ten minutes apiece, I spend 40 minutes a day online. Arbitrary example, I know, but I'm going somewhere :) The advantage of this is that I can then go and read all my Joni messages as and when I please, without having to remain online to do the reading. My modem can download the messages into my mail program far faster than I could read the messages on a web site. Also, the forums such as atforumz use a system called UBB (Ultimate Bulletin Board). These are very good at seperating individual threads on conversation, but less good at giving users a clear idea of whether or not a thread has had new articles added to it since their last visit. Some do, some don't. Whatever, these capabilities rely on your web browser working properly and being up to date - which is a whole other can of worms. For instance, if you don't use cookies, because of security concerns, then tough donuts: lots of the "nice" features of UBB don't work so well. egroups adds advertising to a lot of their stuff, particularly their mailing list stuff. Their mailing lists, in particular, aren't that reliable (ask me how I know). And the problem w.r.t. AOL is not that we're on an "antiquated" listserv (they're not antiquated, and they are not falling out of use on the Internet) but rather that AOL have made a brain dead decision to deny people the luxury of sending plain text e-mail. This is probably to force people to tell their freinds to use AOL (if I'm being cynical.) HTML formatted e-mail is a pain in the butt. It means that the recipient does not get to choose how they view their e-mail, depending on the capabilities of their system: i.e. screen resolution, clarity, available fonts, not to mention the state of their eyes! HTML e-mail that heads my way tends to get filed in the bin: especially those messages with purple text on a green background. The listserv/majordomo approach works well, and the only faff for users is that they need to set up some auto filing in their e-mail program: a once only operation. Most PCs are quite adequtely provided for in terms of processor and disc space, so it's now pretty realistic to let your e-mail client do auto archiving/deleting of items over a certain age, which simplifies housekeeping. Or, like me, you just keep the lot ;) Just some thoughts :) --Chris
