ADMIN: What if ClassicCmp were a blog?

From: JP Hindin <>
Date: Wed Jan 15 22:15:18 2003

On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Jeffrey Sharp wrote:
> Right away, I see several benefits:
> - Members can participate from any computer with a web browser. Even lynx.
And right now members can use any eMail client, even elm or
mutt... They're just as common, right?

> - Anonymity and privacy can be more well-respected. The 'sender' of a
> post is your username, not your email address. A system can be
It surely can't be hard to have the mailing list archival software munge
eMail addresses... It seems to be doing it now okay. Where's the problem?

> - There's no worry about HTML, attachments, wierd character sets, spam,
> virii, or cctech moderation delay.
You can't attach eMails to the list can you? (How do you attach a worm
therefore?). As for HTML and character sets, its a small inconvenience
honestly - not that many posters use it, after all.

> - Your inbox receives less clutter. You spend less bandwidth on mail.
Instead you spend it on all the extra HTML markup on web page posts?

> - It scales well as more members join and start posting.
With a fine MTA (qmail anyone?) you can do alright, but I agree, a slick
mod_perl style web interface probably scales "better".
However, as my friend always used to say, when we are so logged with
traffic that we have scaling issues - well that will be a good day indeed
to know we are that popular, and dealing with it will be a joy.
(He was a Buddhist, what can I say)

> - Features you want can be added in code, quickly. The current setup is
> great for turn-key mailing lists and such, but it is tough to extend.
What kind of extra features?

This is just my two cents; I would rather not move to such a style of
list. I think classiccmp is wonderful the way it is.
Feel free to pick bones out of my retort.

Received on Wed Jan 15 2003 - 22:15:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:36:00 BST