<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> Thank you for the demystification, Horace. Horace Greeley wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:512C559B.6010208@sonic.net" type="cite">Hi, Jim, On 2/25/2013 8:10 PM, Jim Moy wrote: <blockquote type="cite">No, because running a server that you control is quite beyond the scope of simply administering the control panel of a hosted listserv. </blockquote> I respectfully disagree in part. If one chooses to own one's own hardware, provide software, do the installation, server management/maintenance, and all the other cruft that goes along with it, the you are correct... On the other hand, if one chooses to contract with one's ISP, or other service provider, for the provision of the base server and its related software, then the main choices one has to make (if one is using "mailman", anyway) is does one prefer to have a "closed" or an "open" list...that is, does the administrator(s) choose to have to personally act on every subscription request, or, do they allow the built-in controls in the mailman application to handle those basic chores for them. If the contract is properly written, the service provider even backs up both the data and the server, so that there is a level of service provided that is not available with either Facebook or Google. Other than that, the primary responsibility of the administrator(s) would be to be in reasonable contact with the service provider when users report things like spam/etc to see what can be blocked by the co-located spam/AV software. Only FWIW, from watching and reading these discussions as they have come and gone over the last couple of years, and (hopefully) putting politics aside, shutting off something as antique and low-tech as mailman in favor of any replacement (whether HL, Facebook, Google, what-have-you) that requires relatively fast end-user machines with at least ADSL2+ or broadband connections for the web interfaces to work properly automatically cuts off many of the very users who have not only contributed much to the profession over time, but who also either have slow connections (the U.S. is now #10 in the "industrialized west" for internet connection speed and reliability), or slow machines, or both, or who don't have the time to spend waiting while the latest version of Java downloads and installs so that the ads on the page can display. This really isn't rocket science...nowhere close. Frankly, it's so easy and cost effective (as opposed to all of the other solutions which have been suggested so far), that I'm only surprised that no one has pointed out that the very simple and ultimately easiest solution is simply to start up another mailman instance with another service provider. The base server doesn't have to be very large...an old PIV running virtually any semi-modern version of Linux can run mailman in about 4 Gb RAM. The whole archive for both pianotech and the old caut list is under 150MB in (compressed) size...and, looking quickly at my "attachments" directories, even if the now-removed attachments are somehow magically replaced, there would be only 15 - 20 Gb storage required to hold the whole thing. Even if this were to be put up in some portion of the Amazon S3 cloud, this kind of thing might run as much as $25/month to run 24/7/365...even if it turned out to be $50/month, that's only $600/year...or, call it $1,000 per year to be conservative. While I run a number of Linux and other OSes on different boxes for different purposes, for things like this I rely on my ISP and/or one of the Amazon cloud-based services to handle web, mail, and database servers rather than trying to maintain production equipment myself. It's far more cost effective and makes much more efficient use of my own time and energy. It's also cheap. It's really very, very simple. Properly configured, mailman is effectively self-contained and reliant. Mail comes in and goes out. Attachments are properly delivered with the appropriate EM. After their initial subscription, users do not have to sign in, wait for web pages, click on multiple links to where they are going, and, don't get lost in a maze of sub-menus/groups/etc. Archives can be be created automagically. It just works. If the supporting services are contracted with a competent service provider, the human input to the whole system is minimal. Paul's question is the right one to be asking; and, the direct answer is that, as noted above, it depends on which of the above-noted routes one takes. Basically, there's no competent technical or budgetary reason to throw this list under the bus. Anyway, I'm just surprised that no one has suggested this previously. Kind regards. Horace <blockquote type="cite">Jim On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 8:11 PM, paul bruesch <<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paul@bruesch.net">paul@bruesch.net</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:paul@bruesch.net"><mailto:paul@bruesch.net></a>> wrote: Wouldn't it be just as easy to run a mailman listserver? OK, maybe not, but... On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Jim Moy <<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jim@moypiano.com">jim@moypiano.com</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jim@moypiano.com"><mailto:jim@moypiano.com></a>> wrote: A perfectly valid objection to the "cloud computing" way of things. If the pianotech run on Google servers goes away some day, how can you guarantee its contents were preserved for the future, in the way we are able with the Mailman list archives on the server we control? It seems like it would be a good idea to set up a machine subscriber to the Google Group that automatically stores the emails it receives in an archive that is under our control... On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Susan Kline <<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:skline@peak.org">skline@peak.org</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:skline@peak.org"><mailto:skline@peak.org></a>> wrote: There's something else -- I don't trust the likes of Google or Yahoo at all, even though I'm part of a big Yahoo group. And Facebook --- why not just let a bunch of corporate jackals into your private home, unlock everything, let them take whatever they want and piss on the rest? Susan, now getting old and cranky Terry Beckingham wrote: <blockquote type="cite"> Well, I thought I had Google groups figured out, but I guess I was wrong. It appears that the only way I can send to Google groups is to go onto the web and log into my Google account and send from there. I don't like going to the web if I don't have to, because I do not have high speed. I use Eudora for my email and everything comes directly into my Eudora. I can have Google forward from my Gmail account to my other address, but I can't send to Google groups from my Eudora. Am I missing something here? Is there a way to send from my Eudora to Google groups without logging onto my Google account on the web? I'm frustrated. Terry Beckingham </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote> </body> </html>