On Thu, Jun 18, 1998 at 05:44:22PM +0200, Eric Thomas wrote:
> You claim to know the de facto standard better than I do, but you didn't
> even know that 10 years ago LISTSERV was the only game in town.
I "don't know it" because it's not true. MLM software has existed
in various forms for a lot of years -- long before y'all came along.
Oh, sure, a lot of it was homebrewed and a lot of it disappeared,
and a lot of it *needed* to disappear, but the experiments have been
going on for a long time.
> Since these products probably account for over 90% of mailing lists
Do they?
That's a straightforward question. I have not seen this figure cited
before, here or elsewhere. Where did it come from? How was it arrived at?
Is it accurate?
My *subjective* impression, based on continuous monitoring of
the "new-list" mailing list, where new mailing lists are announced,
for the past four years, is that more and more new mailing lists
are using web-based subscription procedures whose backends are either
disguised versions of well-known MLMs, or new ones, or custom code.
Whether that still leaves 90% of them under one of the well-known MLMs
or not, I don't know. But I'd like see a rigorous explanation of
where that number came from.
> but hey, who am I to argue with a Supreme Court judge?
I've never claimed to be such. Please stick to the facts.
> As far as I know, you've been advising people to use Majordomo rather
> than LISTSERV from way before RFC2142.
That is correct. I prefer solutions architected by and for the
Internet community in mutual cooperation.
---Rsk
Rich Kulawiec
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
