Re: TECH: Why this low-tech forum?

Gary Shannon wrote at 2004-05-03 13:41:27 (-0700)
 > --- Roberto Suarez Soto <ask4it@...> wrote:
 > > <delurk>
 > >
 > > On May/03/2004, Felix Ahlner wrote:
 > >
 > > > been any talks about a "real" list like phpBB or
 > > such?
 > >
 > > 	Something that pretends to replace a mailing list but you can
 > > only use from a web browser is not "real", IMHO. I don't know
 > > what mail program you use, but I'm *far* more comfortable using
 > > mine that having to point-and-click my way through the list :-)
 > >
 > > </delurk>
 > >
 > > --
 > >     Roberto Suarez Soto
 >
 > Personally, I'd be much more comfortable if this mailing list were
 > impressed on clay tablets, baked, and delivered quarterly by ox
 > cart.
 >
 > On the other hand, BBS forums have the huge advantage of being able
 > to segregate everything into specific categories and topics.  In
 > truth, as I'm sure I said once several years ago, I'd MUCH rather
 > this were a BBS forum than this stone-age mailing list format.  But
 > alas, there are always those who, like Mark Twain, are in favor of
 > progress but uncomfortable with change.

HTML conlanging forums already exist - see Mark Rosenfelder's Zompist
bboard, for example:

http://www.spinnoff.com/zbb/

If you prefer such a system, go use one.

But I've used BBS systems, and I've used mailing lists, and mailing
lists get my vote.  Email is locally archivable.  Mail clients are not
limited to the text-entry capabilities of browsers.  Even the defects
of mailing lists are advantages - the higher cost of participation
tends to encourage a higher signal to noise ratio*.  The posting limit
prevents the volume of posts from growing so high that you can't at
least glance at every post - which again helps to maintain the quality
of the discourse.


* I know, but on a BBS it'd be even worse.

Reply