ADMIN: OFF TOPIC: URGENT: considering moving the list to a new location

[Guest guest]

> I believe that you can copy all the members of this list to the

new one. I am not 100% sure of that but I think you can and you

should look into that.

>

>

> Michele in California

Hi Michele,

I'm certain that I can send a notice to everyone who is

subscribed (including those set to " no email " ). I think

doing that is a good idea. Also doing this is " easy " .

I'll check on whether I can make people members--- I think

may have stopped allowing that (not sure). If it

is allowed, there is a very real issue with people's

mail settings, and I'd be very cautious about adding

anyone if I can't maintain their email status.

There is also an option where I can send an email with

a link that (I think) makes subscribing a bit easier---

but I need to look into the logistics there--- it may be

easy or it may be a bit cumbersome--- (remember that

there are thousands of subscribers, so the mechanism

does matter............) Anyway, I think that would

also be good to do if it is feasible.

Thanks for your comments.

best,

Moria

[Guest guest]

Moria,

Yes that is what I was suggesting.

-----

Hummm, okay, I guess I misunderstood your suggestion.

I thought you were suggesting doing something " retroactively " --

to messages that are ALREADY in the archive.

Now I think you are talking about future messages.

I think you are suggesting that, in the future, and

over time, people writing could delete extra text.

I agree that it is good, useful, and courteous, when

posting, to delete unneeded text. I'm in favor

of that. A lot of people do that. I do it routinely.

Probably someone or another writes a post to nudge

people to do it now and again.

I'm not sure if you are suggesting something more here.

best wishes,

Moria

=======================================================

[Guest guest]

Dana said:

My personal opinion, which is probably unpopular, is that any benefits of

maintaining archives is outweighed by the problems to current and especially

potential future users. I would just keep this list the way it is.

----

I belong to a list -- and have, on and off, for almost 7 years -- where the

archives are purged periodically. I think sometimes it is a good thing when old

arguments and misunderstandings are no longer " on the record " . And, for

example, it is my understanding that some of what Andy says has changed somewhat

over the years, so maybe it is not such a bad thing if older statements are no

longer available which might require " clarification " from someone digging

through the archives and having issues with what they perceive to be

inconsistencies. I know someone who has been burned very badly when new folks

joined a forum, read the archives and launched a personal attack completely out

of context based on things she said more than a year before. She currently owns

a group that I am a member of and elected to have NO archives to ensure

that it is genuinely " live conversation " and not a record of everything we ever

discussed that new members can dig around in, possibly to enormous

detrimental effect. I have had something similar happen to me, much to the

detriment of that list which is very small. Due in part to the ensuing conflict

(and for other reasons), that list hasn't had any posts to it in a long time and

the last discussion was about whether or not to simply end its existence. The

list owner agreed to not end it and, in the months since, no one has said

anything. So, it is de facto " dead " even though it still exists " on paper " , so

to speak.

My main point is that most folks treat e-mail lists like " live conversation " and

they do not write like their words are being preserved for posterity. On this

list, in part because Moria's website has a LOT of links to e-mails in the

archive but for other reasons as well, the archives are treated as resource to a

degree and in a fashion I have never seen anywhere else. I understand Moria's

concerns and I think that for the list owners, moving the list to preserve the

existing archives is the easiest, most expedient method for them and their

stated goals. Additionally, I understand why some members are upset at the loss

of older parts of the archives. Yet, I agree with you that " moving the list " is

not the only possible solution and that the " right " solution depends upon what

your highest priorities are. Is expediency and preservation of the archives

really the right things to hold up as the " goal " /priority? I do not know. That

isn't my decision to make since I am not a list

owner. But I think it is a worthwhile question to ask. I did not think to ask

it, and simply replied to the situation as framed by upset inquiries into " What

is happening to the archives??? " and " how do we STOP it?? "

The existing practices here concerning how the archives get used grew out of the

fact that it was easy (which is NOT a criticism -- we all have busy lives and it

is a free list, run by volunteer labor so it needs to be easy). But the recent

suggestion to start implementing more formal contributions to the Files section

might be a superior method -- assuming it actually gets implemented. Having

someone submit files which include all the relevant data in one place would be

less cumbersome than searching the archives, rehashing some of the same topics

over and over, etc. But it may require the volunteer staff to grow -- in

number, not just " personally " -- and evolve. The existing staff of 3 for a list

of 5000 members seems to be extremely " short handed " from what I have seen of

other large forums. There are probably a dozen or more moderators in a forum of

around 2000 that I belong to. And one list I am on is part of a group of lists

run by a large volunteer staff of more than a

hundred people (if I recall correctly). That list by itself has only 800 or so

members and 3 moderators. I don't really know where they get such a large

number of staff members or what everyone does. I do know that some years back

they considered formally becoming a charity -- I know because I was part of the

team of " directors " that was supposed to make that happen. My health crisis

forced me to bow out and when I returned 2 years later, the founder had passed

the reins to another and the structure had returned to something more closely

resembling its original form. I have no idea what happened but it appears that

all plans to become a formal charity were dropped.

Just my rambling thoughts in reply to your comment. I am not even sure I had a

" point " . <shrug>

Michele in California

calif.michele@...

webmaster@...

Visit Michele's World! of (Twice) Exceptional Homeschooling

http://www.califmichele.com

" Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding. " --

Albert Einstein

[Guest guest]

> If you would like to add more about what problems you think

> it would cause, that might be helpful.

How many people will actually go to the new list, especially new

parents who are not that computer literate? This is especially true

for those who try to subscribe by sending an email to the old list

[not subscribing on the homepage]. What sort of reply email will they

receive? And even if it is descriptive, will they realize to send new

email, or give up? [This list is linked to a LOT of different places.]

How much " searching the old archives " will be performed, once there is

a new list?

How long will allow a list to take up server space, if it is no

longer active with no new messages? is obviously concerned

about server space, if the archives are being eliminated.

Just a few things I can think of right now.

Dana

[Guest guest]

> > If you would like to add more about what problems you think

> > it would cause, that might be helpful.

Thanks for listing these concerns, Dana.

>

>

> How many people will actually go to the new list, especially new

> parents who are not that computer literate? This is especially

true

> for those who try to subscribe by sending an email to the old list

> [not subscribing on the homepage].

I think this is among the most apparent concerns with moving -- it

requires that people " do something " .

> What sort of reply email will they

> receive?

Unless MEMBERSHIP is turned off (and I know of no reason

to do that), they will get whatever we set up to send them.

In other words, SOMETHING HELPFUL.

> And even if it is descriptive, will they realize to send new

> email, or give up?

same comment as above: yes, new list requires people " do

something " , an obvious issue/downside.

> [This list is linked to a LOT of different places.]

yep. And so are messages in its archive, for that matter.

Naming the new list might help **somewhat**.

>

> How much " searching the old archives " will be performed, once

there is

> a new list?

That is a whole nother thing-- not an issue with moving, but

(I presume) a question about whether moving is " worthwhile " .

I search pretty often, I don't know how much others search.

I've read a number of posts from people who have read the

entire archive. (I haven't but have come fairly close.)

>

> How long will allow a list to take up server space, if it is

no

> longer active with no new messages?

As far as I've been able to determine, the old archive list

would remain as long as there are some (truely tiny) number

of members. is unresponsive to anything I have ever

done to try to contact them to ask questions about anything,

so I know of no reasonable way to confirm this (beyond what

I've already done to ask people who may actually know/care).

A bigger concern (to me) is that a new list will have an

unknown amount of space. I've been trying to find out how

much, and have not been able to find out. (For the record,

in case you're wondering why anyone would bother to worry

about this, 's space allocation to lists has changed

DRASTICALLY over time. They don't currently state the

amount allocated, nor do they report the amount a list is

using.)

Thanks again for listing concerns. If you think of others,

feel free.

best,

Moria

> is obviously concerned

> about server space, if the archives are being eliminated.

>

> Just a few things I can think of right now.

>

> Dana

[Guest guest]

Moria,

Per Dana's comments:

I think that if the list moves, the likelihood that the existing archive will

actually be searched a whole lot goes way down. And it will be " dead " . I think

that a) if a backup can be made, that would preserve the info. all of Dana's

concern together amount to " moving the list might effectively KILL the list " (or

cripple it). What we have now may not be replicable if it is moved.

Since the reason you are considering moving the list is to preserve the data,

perhaps there are other solutions to preserving the data. I know that searching

the archive is really very cumbersome and difficult to turn into useful

information. Others are noticing that and making suggestions that we compile

more info. Perhaps the list has grown to a point where that end of it needs to

be addressed and this crisis is the opportunity to do so.

I know you have expressed interest (in your " wishes " on your website) in doing

this full time if the money were there. There are more than 5300 members. If

you got enough donations to leave your job and work on turning the info here

into a more substantial website than what you have now -- which is mostly links

to the archives but could be reprints with permission or something or even a

compilation of info, etc (a la Dana's View and/or my homeschooling website) --

perhaps that would do more for the list than moving it.

I have a dollar I am doing nothing with and would be happy to give you via

Paypal. If every person here gave an average of a dollar per month....

Do we need a poll to see who supports my " cockamamie idea " ? Can we " hire " you

to work full time for us without turning this into a " fee " service by taking

donations? :-P

And if everyone thinks I am simply NUTS....I swear, I haven't had my coffee yet!

:-P

Michele in California

calif.michele@...

webmaster@...

Visit Michele's World! of (Twice) Exceptional Homeschooling

http://www.califmichele.com

" Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding. " --

Albert Einstein

[Guest guest]

> Thanks again for listing concerns. If you think of others,

> feel free.

Moria,

Would there be a way to keep the list where it is, and move the

archives to a new address instead?

Nell

[Guest guest]

I set up a private list for my son's school PTA many years back. After my son

was kicked out of the school the list fell into disuse. After one year with no

posts deleted the list.

moriamerri <moriam@...> wrote:

How long will allow a list to take up server space, if it is no longer

active with no new messages?

As far as I've been able to determine, the old archive list

would remain as long as there are some (truely tiny) number

of members. is unresponsive to anything I have ever

done to try to contact them to ask questions about anything,

so I know of no reasonable way to confirm this (beyond what

I've already done to ask people who may actually know/care).

A bigger concern (to me) is that a new list will have an

unknown amount of space. I've been trying to find out how

much, and have not been able to find out. (For the record,

in case you're wondering why anyone would bother to worry

about this, 's space allocation to lists has changed

DRASTICALLY over time. They don't currently state the

amount allocated, nor do they report the amount a list is

using.)

Thanks again for listing concerns. If you think of others,

feel free.

best,

Moria

lgrharmom@...

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

> I set up a private list for my son's school PTA many years back.

After my son was kicked out of the school the list fell into disuse.

After one year with no posts deleted the list.

>

I've been a member or moderator for at least a few groups

that have been NOTIFIED that a post is required to continue

to maintain the group. I have read that a minimum number

of users eliminates this requirement. However, I just looked

up the policy, and it doesn't say that. In any case, it should

be possible to post something every 90 days without making

posting generally available.

best,

Moria

Here is 's policy on this subject:

http://search1.cc.scd./cct_search.php?

ui_mode=answer & prior_transaction_id=331102 & action_code=5 & highlight_inf

o=16778277,54,63 & turl=http%3A%2F%2Fhelp.%2Fhelp%2Fus%

2Fgroups%2Fgroups-55.html & answer_id=1393748#__highlight

I received an email notification saying my group could be deleted due

to inactivity. Why? What can I do?

To improve the quality of the service, periodically

cleans up inactive groups from the system. Inactive groups take up

valuable space in the Groups directory and use names that other

people might want to use for their own group. This clean-up procedure

keeps the service fresh and active.

An active group is defined as one with at least 2 members and at

least one message posted within a 90-day period.

Owners and moderators of inactive groups receive email notifications

asking them to make the group active or request an extension. If you

have received a notice, all you have to do is post a message and make

sure you have at least 2 people in your group.

If your group is seasonal in nature and has long periods of

inactivity, just click on the " request an extension " link in the

email notification you received. Your group will be reactivated for

another 90 days.