At 2:46 AM -0500 2/3/1997, David B. Smith wrote:
>AOL could essentially do what I've done here. Create an AOL conference
>-- or whatever they call them there -- for each list that has a
>"significant" number of AOL subscribers. The interface becomes
>consistent for all the users, as well as being manageable by AOL staff.
This idea has been discussed -- gateway virtually every mailing
list in the world (at least, all those on PAML) to Usenet newsgroups,
and then allow AOL users to read at their leisure (and catch up, or
fall behind, as they choose).
However, I think most people who've been on this list for a while
will remember the extreme vitriol that was levelled at AltaVista when
they tried this kind of thing, and not much less was levelled at
InReference (at least they set the default of "if you do nothing, we
will not subscribe and archive your list", while AltaVista set the
opposite default).
I don't think AOL would fare any better, but perhaps you folks
could prove me wrong.
>No subscribing or unsubscribing by users is necessary at all -- AOL
>subscribes, and provides access in that fashion. The mailbox
>limitations become meaningless -- individuals don't have to keep the
>message flow in their personal mailboxes anymore. No more bounces to
>the list -- AOL absorbs the incoming traffic seamlessly. (I assume.)
The issue of posting becomes a problem, however. If a list only
allows subscribed users to post, how do the hundreds (or thousands)
of AOL users who are "subscribed" to the list via Usenet news post to
it? Unfortunately, they don't (which makes the idea virtually
useless to most of them).
--
Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com
comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer <http://www.his.com/~brad/>
finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code
The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at <http://www.his.com/~brad/sendmail/>
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
