Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: st: RE: Correct Way to Respond to Posts when Email is Turned Off
From
"Steve Martin" <[email protected]>
To
<[email protected]>
Subject
RE: st: RE: Correct Way to Respond to Posts when Email is Turned Off
Date
Mon, 1 Aug 2011 13:35:18 +0100
Ditto for me too.
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Schaffer, Mark E
Sent: 31 July 2011 16:12
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: st: RE: Correct Way to Respond to Posts when Email is Turned
Off
-1 from me, too. Same reasons as Phil's #1 and #2.
--Mark
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Phil Schumm
> Sent: 29 July 2011 21:42
> To: [email protected]
> 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/
>
--
Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity
registered under charity number SC000278.
*
* 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/
*
* 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/