Re: [seul-edu] Mail list versus UUNET newgroup

[G <guycad@mindspring.com>]

On Sat, 18 May 2002 11:12:29 -0400, you wrote:

>The first concern here is a show-stopper--if it can't be done we won't 
>put up the web forum.  The second is a very nice to have, but if it 
>can't be done we can still proceed.

I read Jan's response before reading yours. [laughing] I have
looked through the application index several times and
apparently never made the connection with the other software you
reffered to.

I completely agree that the forum and email users would have to
be front ends to the same discussion threads. In fact, I see now
I had implicitly assumed that.

I personally don't for the listserv approach as I feel (whether
this is true or not), that it adds to the latency. The forum
approach feels much more like face to face to me. Of course,
everyone has a personal preference.

FUDforum already has a built in automatic email component. The
question in my mind is how much effort is involved in enhancing
user profiles to support email users of the forum. One of the
nice things about going with this approach for email users is
that you could include in the subject line of emails sent to
them which thread the email is for. Then they could set their
email clients to put partuclar thread's of interest mail into
individual mail folders. I often do this with Agent.

When the total number of emails starts to approach 2,000, I find
that I'm constantly scrolling up and down to find all the pieces
even though my email is presented as threaded. This is because
some of the email clients out there 'break' the threading. Older
versions of Outlook (no surprise here) do this all the time.
Also, people often send a new email to a thread rather than
reply to it. The forum approach helps group threading regardless
of email client. I.E. email users can reply to a thread or send
a new message to a thread. Both would be kept with the thread.

Best regards,
Guy

----------

And 98% of women said they would rather date someone who liked cats, than someone who did not.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1965000/1965499.stm