I'm really not trying to be a pain, and I somewhat see the value of an OT
list, I really don't want to see it on a yahoo, or any other web base,
list. Could we get a gzg-ot@csua.berkeley.edu, or some other email
based list?
I can list a whole lot of reasons that I think this is better (and am sure
each can be matched with a counter reason), but several people have already
expressed a desire to avoid web based lists, and I have to concur 100%.
Rand.
> At 03:35 PM 6/5/2002 -0700, you wrote:
Ground Zero Games schrieb:
> Aside from this, I do still think that the idea of a
> the co-operation of everyone involved.
In fact, it would not even be neccessary to create such a list. Yahoo Groups
has several suitable lists already, e.g.:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/talkingwargames/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wargames_mongrel/
As most members of GZG-l are already on one or more yahoo list, joining
one of these would not be a technical problem. Agreeing on one may be, though.
Greetings
KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de wrote: Ground Zero Games schrieb:
> Aside from this, I do still think that the idea of a
> the co-operation of everyone involved.
In fact, it would not even be neccessary to create such a list. Yahoo Groups
has several suitable lists already, e.g.:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/talkingwargames/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wargames_mongrel/
As most members of GZG-l are already on one or more yahoo list, joining
one of these would not be a technical problem. Agreeing on one may be, though.
Greetings Karl Heinz I've taken the liberty to start a yahoo group just for
this. If you go to
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GZG-OT
you will find a new group just for this. Please everyone on the list
feel free to sign up and use this for any on or off-topic posts. I
personally love the noise on this list, it's ten times more interesting and
informative than many other lists signal.
From: ~ On Behalf Of KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de
Sent: 05 June 2002 09:27
Subject: Off Topic list
Ground Zero Games schrieb:
> Aside from this, I do still think that the idea of a
> In fact, it would not even be neccessary to create
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/talkingwargames/
> As most members of GZG-l are already on one or more
Not by intention. Yahoo bought E-groups, the outfit
who'd previously run the two forums I subscribe to. Given that we were being
moved to a larger outfit, the service not as good and has become progressively
worse.
> .. joining one of these would not be a technical
Very true.
Going on what I read in the UK trade press, Yahoo have a reputation that is
going from bad to worse.
Web users get bombarded with pop-up adverts inserted
between every few postings unless the list owner pays
a fee to inhibit them, and e-mail readers have to
trust their addresses to an organisation that reserves the right to change its
privacy policy without notice, and has done so.
My opinion of HTML-based discussion groups is on
record under the thread [OT] An Idea (30/5/2002).
Reaching back into the mists of time, do some other list members have axes to
grind regarding the FT Web Ring, or am I confusing Yahoo with some other cheap
money-grubbing outfit?
In the four(?) years I've been subscribing to the CSUA service, I've got
through three ISPs and two PCs (more if I include the times I've subscribed
from works accounts). I really think we take its stability and reliability for
granted.
Just a note, Mozilla has a nice feature that disables popups altogether:
no click, no window. Just today they finally released the finished version
(loong beta process). It's very secure, gaining popularity with
websites (It's Netscape 6) and has a virus-free email client That makes
the Yahoo experience a lot easier. I had not known they was doing popups,
because I turned 'em off on the client side.
> CS Renegade wrote:
> Very true.
On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 01:43:32 -0700, Randall Joiner
<rljoiner@mindspring.com> wrote:
> I'm really not trying to be a pain, and I somewhat see the value of an
I agree with Randall, and I'm on a number of Yahoo lists, even.
Oh, and Randall, either your computer or your ISP's server is improperly set
up. Your e-mails are coming out as 2001. This means those of us with
mail boxes sorted by date and with some old, read material can't easily find
your
e-mails. I didn't notice several of yours until I cleared out my GZG
mail box and saw I still had several unread messages in it.
On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 01:43:32 -0700, Randall Joiner
<rljoiner@mindspring.com> wrote:
> I'm really not trying to be a pain, and I somewhat see the value of an
I agree with Randall, and I'm on a number of Yahoo lists, even.
Oh, and Randall, either your computer or your ISP's server is improperly set
up. Your e-mails are coming out with a year of 2001, not 2002. This
means those of us with mail boxes sorted by date and with some old, read
material
can't easily find your e-mails. I didn't notice several of yours until I
cleared out my GZG mail box and saw I still had several unread messages in it.