 | | Re: CFD: Subgroups for lugnet.org.us & lugnet.trains.org
|
|
Todd, Could we have this yesterday? :-) ... (...) Many more on the way for sure, if what I see going on is accurate, including a group in Italy, The South Eastern US, and a Train club in St. Louis among others. (...) Although I don't think NELUG is (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-99, to lugnet.org.us)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: Subgroups for lugnet.org.us & lugnet.trains.org
|
|
(...) which (...) Good point. There might also be some comments that you wouldn't want to say on LUGNET (and therefore in "public"), but you might want to discuss on a private mailing list. Not to keep it from anyone, but just that the venue is less (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-99, to lugnet.org.us)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: Subgroups for lugnet.org.us & lugnet.trains.org
|
|
(...) Oh, I definitely agree -- a group probably wouldn't want absolutely positively everything always to have to be 100% publicly readable... especially if it had lots of cursing and things like that. :) But I wonder how you go about actually (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-99, to lugnet.org.us)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: Subgroups for lugnet.org.us & lugnet.trains.org
|
|
(...) However the mailing list software I am familiar with (Listproc and Majordomo) require you to be a subscriber in order to access the archives (or at least can be, and usually are, configured that way). (25 years ago, 23-Nov-99, to lugnet.org.us)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: Subgroups for lugnet.org.us & lugnet.trains.org
|
|
(...) I'd say no. GMLTC still doesn't offically have one. It had a soft opening but... and it was in existence for years without having one, without having a name, even. (...) Again, no. GMLUG has never met. But it accomplishes good things in the (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-99, to lugnet.org.us)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: Subgroups for lugnet.org.us & lugnet.trains.org
|
|
(...) So anyone can still subscribe, snoop through the archives, then unsubscribe on a whim...? That's not private. --Todd (25 years ago, 23-Nov-99, to lugnet.org.us)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: Subgroups for lugnet.org.us & lugnet.trains.org
|
|
(...) Say, Eric, how do you maintain NELUG's member list? (Add new people's names, keep track of their email addresses, list their websites, etc.) It just occurred to me when I saw this page, (URL) LUGNET could help automate some of those sorts of (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-99, to lugnet.org.us)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: Subgroups for lugnet.org.us & lugnet.trains.org
|
|
(...) I think most mailers give you the option of automatically allowing subscribes, OR of requiring a human to approve the subscribe. Not MUCH better but a bit. Most large lists run as automatically allowing subscribes, though. (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.org.us)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: Subgroups for lugnet.org.us & lugnet.trains.org
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <383B39A3.DB5A938C@v...er.net>... (...) unsubscribe (...) I run two club lists on Majordomo which are "closed" which means I (or one of the other people the list owner id forwards to, or in fact anyone who knows the (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.org.us)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: Subgroups for lugnet.org.us & lugnet.trains.org
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message <383b1a64.153493579@...et.com>... (...) in (...) NELUG's (...) the (...) Cool. (...) /org/us/xyzpdq/ (...) just (...) Cool. (...) Sounds good to me. Hmm, we're just barely there for a triangle (Raleigh/Durham NC) group (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.org.us)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: Subgroups for lugnet.org.us & lugnet.trains.org
|
|
(...) As you probably guessed it is all manual. (...) Something like this would be wonderful. It might take a little time to get things synchronized but it would probably be much simpler to maintain in the long run. I would definitly like to talk to (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.org.us)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: Subgroups for lugnet.org.us & lugnet.trains.org
|
|
(...) only archiving, or no archiving. We chose to leave the archives open to everyone. I guess if we ever wanted to take a discussion out of the public eyes, we could just start a discussion by "replying to all recipients" or something. I do like (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.org.us)
|
