On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Kevin LaTona <[email protected]> wrote:
> As far as Google groups go.
>
> I believe that would force everyone to have to sign up again and or have a
> google account to do so.

It would require everyone to sign up again. It would probably require
them to have a Google account, although with Yahoo at least you could
send an invitation to somebody and they could confirm, and thus get on
the list without having a full Yahoo account. I'm not sure if Google
does this, or if we could send a bulk invitation to all existing
subscribers.

> If so, that is going to be a lot of work don't you think?

For the organizers, it's just a few screens to set up the lists. For
members, it means subscribing.

> Right now this list while public in nature is still private and limited to
> it's members only.
>
> Or is it being crawled by Google, Yahoo or Bing, etc..

The archives are public.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Sea+PIG+python+meeting+site%3Alists.seapig.org&hl=en&tbo=1&biw=621&bih=725&num=10&lr=&ft=i&cr=&safe=images

The list of subscribers is admin-only.

> The nice thing about this list is just works right now with very little
> effort on anyone's part.
>
> Do we really what to change what has and is working just fine?

There is little ongoing work, but as I said every time we install a
new OS version we have to reconfigure it, and the people who used to
do that are not around.

> If we do change it will we loose or gain members?

We would probably lose members as people don't resubscribe. On the
other hand, some of those have probably stopped reading the messages
anyway. There may be some promotional advantage to being on Google
Groups, but I don't know what specifically that would be.

The issue to me is that (1) searching in the archive would be more
convenient. (2) Showing a message thread in one page as a
"conversation" is nice, especially when it spans months. (The Mailman
archive is by month.)

> Do we really want search engines reading it?
>
> Do we gain or loose anything by doing this?

It was a different era when the list was set up. I come from the early
1990s Internet where it was mostly researchers and students, and
everybody used their real names and made most things public. Then came
the AOL era where people used fake names and had multiple identities
for their different personas and predators/bosses started doing bad
things to people they met/saw online.

The list was created in 2000, and because the founders were from the
older Internet midset, and because it was an open-source topic
(Python), we made everything public as much as possible. Now we're in
a third era where social networks have become a more central part of
everybody's lives. Whether that means we should stick to our original
values or modify them, I don't know.

But I would start with the principle that the list is an extension of
the meetings, and everyone is invited to the meetings and can read the
meeting notes. of course, going to a meeting takes a greater
commitment than stumbling on a list archive via a search engine, so
that's something there.

> So far no one has ever hijack or spammed this list that I have ever seen.

Spam messages go to a moderator bucket for approval, almost all of
them because the sender is not subscribed. That's one thing that would
be easier with Google Groups. On the other hand, there hasn't been a
spam message for several months.

-- 
Mike Orr <[email protected]>

Reply via email to