Re: st: RE: Correct Way to Respond to Posts when Email is Turned Off

[Austin Nichols <austinnichols@gmail.com>]

Marcello et al.--
Same here, -1.

My opinions are unchanged since 2006, but it turns out that my post
was truncated:
http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2006-05/msg00115.html
should have started:
"Richard:
 I'm a big fan of the gmail Web-based client, which is very different
from Eudora, but is free and offers a very easy search mechanism (not
surprising, since it was created by Google). "

The search is of more and more use the longer you are on gmail, and
the more you use gmail, of course.
Had I not been using gmail in 2006, I could not have searched for
"reading statalist efficiently from:me"
to find that old message in one second.

On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Schaffer, Mark E
<M.E.Schaffer@hw.ac.uk> wrote:
> -1 from me, too.  Same reasons as Phil's #1 and #2.
>
> --Mark
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
>> [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Phil Schumm
>> Sent: 29 July 2011 21:42
>> To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
>> Subject: Re: st: RE: Correct Way to Respond to Posts when
>> Email is Turned Off
>>
>> On 7/29/2011 2:19 PM, Philip Jones wrote:
>> > Speaking of web forums, what is the reason that Statalist
>> hasn't migrated from its LISTSERV origins to a modern,
>> threaded, easy-to-track-what-you've-read web forum? I believe
>> there is a good reason that most discussion sites now use
>> something like UBB or the like.
>>
>> On Jul 29, 2011, at 1:49 PM, Marcello Pagano wrote:
>> > We almost did a few years ago, but it was a little
>> premature then and we would have lost a few folks with less
>> modern equipment.  Maybe we should reconsider.  Any negative
>> votes??  Don't give me the positives, I think I know them.
>>
>>
>> -1 from me (though I would love to see us move from Majordomo
>> to Mailman).  My primary reasons for this are:
>>
>> 1) I realize that this is a personal decision, but I vastly
>> prefer to consume Statalist in my email client (for many reasons).
>>
>> 2) I think it would be a mistake to base Statalist solely on
>> a "pull" technology (i.e., requiring you to go to the web to
>> read it), and email is by far the "push" technology with
>> which most people are familiar.
>>
>> 3) Although some web-based discussion services will let you
>> send (and receive) email, they often clobber messages in the
>> process (e.g., hard-wrap, add formatting or other cruft, etc.).
>>
>> It's worth noting that even today, the standard for
>> open-source software collaboration (e.g., SourceForge,
>> GitHub, Bitbucket, etc.) is to use a standard mailing list
>> (in combination of course with a version control system,
>> bug/issue tracker, Wiki, etc.).
>>
>> I wouldn't be strongly opposed to moving to something that
>> provided a web-based interface (e.g., the non-Usenet variety
>> of Google Groups), as long as it provided all of the
>> functionality we have currently (i.e., ability to send and
>> receive email without munging the headers and/or body).
>>
>>
>> -- Phil

*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/