Re: Gmane

li_sasxsek@NUTTER.NET wrote:
> I'd much prefer that all of these be taken over to Usenet.
> It's a shame alt.language.artificial doesn't get used much anymore.
What are 'these'? The conlang lists?

Philippe Debar wrote:
> I prefer newsgroups to mailing list and web interfaces as I
> can quickly download what I want when I want and get a nice
> threaded view of things, without burdening my inbox.
While I prefer my lists to come to my inbox or more precisely, to the folder
I've specified, since I use procmail. If I have to go to a newsgroup to
participate, my involvement dramatically drops toward zero. :)

Not that my preference precludes the use of gmane, since we get both worlds
that way.

Philippe Debar wrote:
> I'll wait some more before acting. Any other reaction to my
> Gmane proposal ?
If it operates as advertised, I don't feel there is a problem.

Philip Newton wrote:
> Historical reasons, as far as I know. I think the gateway
> used to be to eGroups or Onelist or some other such name,
> which was apparently a decent enough service, but was bought
> out by Yahoo at some point.
eGroups was being used as web-gateway to the list. Yahoo! bought eGroups
ages ago.
Presumably, eGroups was used for those that didn't like to have mail coming
to their inbox (eGroups had some nice options for this).

Philippe Debar wrote:
> > I prefer newsgroups to mailing list and web interfaces as I can
> > quickly download what I want when I want and get a nice threaded view
> > of things, without burdening my inbox.
H. S. Teoh wrote:
> I use a fully threaded mailer[1] and I get my mail directly
> off a caching SMTP server with no size limit (and no lame web
> interfaces). But then my setup can hardly be called typical, so YMMV.
I think Philippe's thought about "burdening my inbox" is not about space,
but about clutter something I understand, since even though I use procmail
to move all list mail and some other things into folders, I still tend to
end up with 100s of messages in my inbox.

Are there mail programs out there that _don't_ do threading? I thought that
tended to be a given in a mail client...

taliesin the storyteller wrote:
> Last time this was shot down (in... 1998? 1999? earlier?) it
> was because of privacy reasons and control. It is possible to
> evict someone from a mailing-list after all (I think I was
Gmane actually addresses this issue:

"Other groups are non-public. These are mailing lists that don't accept
messages from non-subscribers. If you try to post to either of these kinds
of groups, you'll get a bounce message from Gmane informing you of this. "

I believe CONLANG is a subscriber only list, so gmane would only be useful
for reading, you'd still need to send replies to the mailing list itself:

"Some non-public mailing lists allow you to subscribe, and then alter the
status of the subscription so that it doesn't actually send you any mail.
You can then read the group via Gmane, and post to the list "manually" -- by
sending mail directly to the mailing list."
---
Overall, I don't have any objections. I'm sure it will be useful for those
that would prefer to access the list via nntp (I don't know what subset of
conlang is represented there, however).

I will point out this sounds like something the list moderator(s)/owner(s)
should be consulted, since they would have to deal with any problems that
might arise.

Iain

Reply