Searching \ for '[OT] sent by Nabble.com?' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=sent+nabblecom
Search entire site for: 'sent by Nabble.com?'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] sent by Nabble.com?'
2005\12\17@093711 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Mike, K8LH (sent by Nabble.com, with unknown email address, posting through
the "anonymous email proxy" spam_OUTlistsTakeThisOuTspamnabble.com) wrote:

> [...]
> http://forum.microchip.com/upfiles/22956/Mk26167.jpg -- Sent from the
> MicroControllers - PIC forum at Nabble.com:
> http://www.nabble.com/-PIC-Internal-clock-t748357.html#a1973399

This is a new thing... Anonymous contributions to the list. I'm not sure I
like this, but I'm not sure whether what I don't like about it is
relevant...

One thing that I don't like is the additional footer with the Nabble.com
advertising. Another thing is that these posters are anonymous, and not
(necessarily) list members. In this they are different from everybody else.

This is different from gmane.org, for example. One has to be list member to
be able to post to the list through gmane.org, and the poster's list email
has to be in the From header of the post.

Gerhard

2005\12\17@100544 by ike, K8LH (sent by Nabble.com)

flavicon
face

Hi Gerhard,

I am a list member Sir...  Just never opted to receive list postings via email and never really liked the PICList Archive viewer mechanism...  I simply discovered Nabble recently and really enjoy the interface much better...

Can you show me what the offending posts actually look like Sir?  My email address is k8lh arrl.net

Happy Holidays...  Best regards, Mike
--
Sent from the MicroControllers - PIC forum at Nabble.com:
www.nabble.com/-PIC-Internal-clock-t748357.html#a1988162

2005\12\17@121926 by R Morris (sent by Nabble.com)

flavicon
face

Sent by  Gerhard Fiedler, [OT] sent by Nabble.com?  2005-12-17 06:35

>[This is a new thing... Anonymous contributions to the list. I'm not sure I
>like this, but I'm not sure whether what I don't like about it is
>relevant...

Nabble is a new free service that archives and threads mail lists in real time and has some nice search features and whatnot. It does allow registered users to post to lists without subscribing directly; however, while many do like this feature, some don't and it can be turned off for any list that prefers to only get posts from subscribed users. In our next release, probably in January, we will be adding an option for posting only by list members. If the list members and owners prefer this option, then let us know and we'll get it changed for the list.

As to the footer, you have a point. Personally, I hate spam, but we wanted people to know how to view the post in context of the discussion in an easy way. We're surely open to suggestions on improvement which you can forward to me directly or via our support forum located here:

http://www.nabble.com/Nabble-Support-f1.html

Regards,
Rod Morris
Nabble.com

--
Sent from the MicroControllers - PIC forum at Nabble.com:
www.nabble.com/-PIC-Internal-clock-t748357.html#a1989163

2005\12\17@125617 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Mike, K8LH (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:

> I am a list member Sir...  

I actually thought that you were. This was nothing personal, just a matter
of a principle discussion -- not about you, but about nabble.com.

> Can you show me what the offending posts actually look like Sir?  My
> email address is k8lh arrl.net

It seems that nabble.com posts are all posted through a single piclist
account, .....listsKILLspamspam@spam@nabble.com. Your recent post through nabble.com had this as
>From header:

 > From: "Mike, K8LH (sent by Nabble.com)" <listsspamKILLspamnabble.com>

On closer inspection, there is a X-Nabble-From header that reveals the
email address that you registered at nabble.com:

 > X-Nabble-From: Mike, K8LH <.....k8lhKILLspamspam.....arrl.net>

However, I'm not sure whether that actually has to be your piclist address.
Since nabble.com posts all posts through EraseMElistsspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTnabble.com, probably not.
This makes nabble.com a "piclist anonymizer" :)

gmane.org (an email-to-news-and-back gateway) also allows posting through
it. But it requires that the poster uses a From header that is subscribed
to the list, and uses this header for the email it sends to the list.
That's different from nabble.com.

Compare for example the messages posted through nabble.com
<search.gmane.org/?query=nabble&group=gmane.comp.hardware.microcontrollers.pic>
with posts through gmane.org, for example mine
<http://search.gmane.org/?email=lists%40connectionbrazil.com&group=gmane.comp.hardware.microcontrollers.pic>

Gerhard

2005\12\17@142429 by ike, K8LH (sent by Nabble.com)

flavicon
face

Don,

I'd like to personally thank you and Nabble for providing an easy to use, intuitive, and cohesive mechanism for viewing real-time PICList posts...  This is very exciting for me because I prefer not to receive List emails and the Archive Viewer mechanism at PICList is very clumsy and cumbersome...  I would be happy to provide List credentials if required in the future to continue using your fine graphic interface to real-time PICList Archives...

Happy Holidays...  Best regards, Mike McLaren - K8LH (Westland, Michigan, USA)
--
Sent from the MicroControllers - PIC forum at Nabble.com:
www.nabble.com/-PIC-Internal-clock-t748357.html#a1990293

2005\12\17@162433 by Peter

picon face

I have posted before on the theme of 'mirroring' the piclist in various
places on the net. This has happened several times until now. I would
like to say a few words.

1. The principal motivation of aggregators is that of generating
clickthrough traffic and ad views, or that of selling aggregate works.
It is immaterial whether they do it now or in ten years. Aggregation
experiments and betas are of course not that (or rather not yet).

2. People subscribe to a mailing list with the expectation of its
working and archiving their, and other poster's postings, in a certain
way. Interesting developments, such as their ten-year old rants and
flames appearing in an internet archive later, to be found by anyone who
likes to look, is not a part of those expectations.

For these reasons I think that mailing lists (including this one) should
make it clear to any subscriber that the subscription of a robot,
aggregator, or any other type of device with public access to the list
requires permission.

This is not to say that such access should be prohibited, but imho,
finding out about such access in a Google search is not the way to go.

Peter

2005\12\17@185132 by Dave Lag

picon face
R Morris (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:
> Sent by  Gerhard Fiedler, [OT] sent by Nabble.com?  2005-12-17 06:35
>>[This is a new thing... Anonymous contributions to the list. I'm not sure I
>>like this, but I'm not sure whether what I don't like about it is
>>relevant...
>
> Nabble is a new free service that archives and threads mail lists in real time and has some nice search features and whatnot. It does allow registered users to post to lists without subscribing directly; however, while many do like this feature, some don't and it can be turned off for any list that prefers to only get posts from subscribed users. In our next release, probably in January, we will be adding an option for posting only by list members. If the list members and owners prefer this option, then let us know and we'll get it changed for the list.
> As to the footer, you have a point. Personally, I hate spam, but we wanted people to know how to view the post in context of the discussion in an easy way. We're surely open to suggestions on improvement which you can forward to me directly or via our support forum located here:
> http://www.nabble.com/Nabble-Support-f1.html
> Regards,
> Rod Morris
> Nabble.com

Well I can't speak for the admins but I think posters should be members,
their names should appear as if they posted directly and the generated
posts should be required to conform to list rules: eg
topic prefix [OT] [EE] etc.
Don't see why admins should be subjected to any additional workload.
How would you moderate a nabble poster?
D

2005\12\17@190911 by M Graff

flavicon
face
Dave Lag wrote:
> Well I can't speak for the admins...

Nor can I, but I do have some thoughts about sites like nabble.com.  I'm
not picking on them specifically, but on all sites that provide an
"alternate" view of an email list.

One, when you go to the nabble site, it doesn't clearly say that the
list is not RUN by nabble.com -- in fact, looking at the pages it makes
every attempt to hide the fact that it isn't.  This in and of itself
isn't bad, but it makes it appear that nabble.com is a great innovator
and is sponsoring all these wonderful lists, when all they're doing is
acting as a glorified usenet gateway.

IMHO, I would ask nabble to stop any lists I run for just that reason --
_I_ run them, not someone else.

--Michael

2005\12\17@192333 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 12/18/05, M Graff <explorer-piclistspamspam_OUTflame.org> wrote:
>
> IMHO, I would ask nabble to stop any lists I run for just that reason --
> _I_ run them, not someone else.
>
> --Michael

Personally I also do not like nabble.com. Actually I do not like
any PIClist archives other than the official PIClist.com. For this
matter, I do not even like Gmane's archive. It is okay to have the
news feed but I do not like to see that they put the archives on the web.

http://piclist-pic.blogspot.com/ is now down. But I think
http://archive.nnytech.net/sgroup/piclist is still alive. Maybe
there are others. I hope that there is a way to stop this. If not
then we have to live with the fact. ;-(

Regards,
Xiaofan

2005\12\17@192609 by David Van Horn

picon face
> One, when you go to the nabble site, it doesn't clearly say that the
> list is not RUN by nabble.com -- in fact, looking at the pages it
makes
> every attempt to hide the fact that it isn't.  This in and of itself
> isn't bad, but it makes it appear that nabble.com is a great innovator
> and is sponsoring all these wonderful lists, when all they're doing is
> acting as a glorified usenet gateway.

It does look to me like they are offering up this content as their own.
I wouldn't stand for it.




2005\12\17@193615 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face

On Dec 17, 2005, at 1:24 PM, Peter wrote:

> Interesting developments, such as their ten-year old rants and flames
> appearing in an internet archive later, to be found by anyone who
> likes to look, is not a part of those expectations.
>
It ought to be, given dejanews and the tremendous negative feelings
generated when it was discovered that some of the early and classic
arpanet mailing lists HADN'T been archived...

BillW

2005\12\17@194742 by R Morris (sent by Nabble.com)

flavicon
face

M Graff wrote:

>>One, when you go to the nabble site, it doesn't clearly say that the
list is not RUN by nabble.com -- in fact, looking at the pages it makes
every attempt to hide the fact that it isn't.

That not our intent at all. When the lists were set up, minimmal information was entered to describe the archive. One difference about Nabble is that anyone can modify the description or even the catalog. It's not as user friendly as it will be when we implement a new wiki type editing function; however, you will see a link to modify the forum on the main page. Enter whatever you like and I'll force the change through. The current system uses a voting scheme that's a little cumbersome which is why we going to the wiki model.

http://www.nabble.com/MicroControllers---PIC-f2059.html

Rod Morris
Nabble.com

--
Sent from the MicroControllers - PIC forum at Nabble.com:
www.nabble.com/-PIC-Internal-clock-t748357.html#a1992739

2005\12\17@195859 by R Morris (sent by Nabble.com)

flavicon
face

Dave Lag wrote:

>>Well I can't speak for the admins but I think posters should be members,
their names should appear as if they posted directly and the generated
posts should be required to conform to list rules: eg
topic prefix [OT] [EE] etc.

As  I mentioned, we can suspend local posting if the list members and owners prefer this option until the next release which would only allow members to post similar to how gmane does it. I'm not sure how to enforce list rules though these could be included in the forum description with a link to the page that describes these conventions. There's a Modify Forum link where you or anyone can do this located here:

http://www.nabble.com/MicroControllers---PIC-f2059.html

>How would you moderate a nabble poster?

If you look at eh local archive, there's a rating system for posts. Any poster rated a 1 will not have any post forwarded to a list. We also have some other methods to attempt to address issues like spammers whcih are obviously a major problem. In the next release, we'll be defaulting to posts only from subscribed members which of course puts all the power in the admins hands to ban as the normally would.  And as I mentioned, if we have any problems, the admins can ask to suspend local posting.

Rod Morris
Nabble.com



--
Sent from the MicroControllers - PIC forum at Nabble.com:
www.nabble.com/-PIC-Internal-clock-t748357.html#a1992797

2005\12\17@224543 by n Pergola (sent by Nabble.com)

flavicon
face

Uh oh, I'm one of the "guilty" people here.

The other day, I thought I could provide some insight to a thread, so I sent a message to the PICList (via Nabble) to explain that many PIC18F parts can be bulk erased with a Vdd voltage less than 4.5 volts (with respect to Vss) -- at least from the documentation's standpoint.

I hope I have not broken any rules here -- I was just trying to be helpful.

PICList Administrators: Am I welcome to send messages via Nabble?

What if I (or someone) else is able to help someone out (who objects to Nabble and "outsiders")? I thought the whole point of the PICList and forum communities is for people to help each other out. Does it really matter if I'm not currently a PICList member or posting outside of the PICList?

If posting to the PICList from Nabble is not acceptable, just let me know and I will not do it, but instead I'll go through the proper channels (PICList).

Best regards and thank you,

Ken Pergola
--
Sent from the MicroControllers - PIC forum at Nabble.com:
www.nabble.com/-PIC-Internal-clock-t748357.html#a1993612

2005\12\18@004636 by Dave Lag

picon face
Ken Pergola (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:
> Uh oh, I'm one of the "guilty" people here.
>
> The other day, I thought I could provide some insight to a thread, so I sent a message to the PICList (via Nabble) to explain that many PIC18F parts can be bulk erased with a Vdd voltage less than 4.5 volts (with respect to Vss) -- at least from the documentation's standpoint.
>
> I hope I have not broken any rules here -- I was just trying to be helpful.
>
> PICList Administrators: Am I welcome to send messages via Nabble?
>
> What if I (or someone) else is able to help someone out (who objects to Nabble and "outsiders")? I thought the whole point of the PICList and forum communities is for people to help each other out. Does it really matter if I'm not currently a PICList member or posting outside of the PICList?
>
> If posting to the PICList from Nabble is not acceptable, just let me know and I will not do it, but instead I'll go through the proper channels (PICList).
>
> Best regards and thank you,
>
> Ken Pergola
> --
> Sent from the MicroControllers - PIC forum at Nabble.com:
> http://www.nabble.com/-PIC-Internal-clock-t748357.html#a1993612

I can't imagine your posts ever being a problem, you are on my don't
miss list.

With mailman as I understand it one would just suspend delivery to avoid
emailed posts but still be in the list database as a user. Have done
this on other lists.
Dave

2005\12\18@020949 by James Newton, Host

face picon face
Nabble seems to do a reasonable job of hiding email addresses and so is
probably not selling you out to the spammers. They /could/ be doing that,
but so could any subscriber to the list. It is very unlikely that someone
would publish the fact that they subscribe to the list (as nabble does) and
then doing something like that. The silent lurker is more likely to use your
information in a bad way.

Nabble must be subscribed to the list in order to post to the list for their
members. The first time they post some crap or one of their users gets out
of hand, nabbles account will be moderated or just removed. We run the
PICList, and so what gets on it is still very much under our control and our
responsibility.

I like the user / post rating thing nabble does. I've been wanting to add
something like that to the "official" archive for some time and just haven't
gotten around to it.

While it would be a darn good idea if nabble would be a bit more clear that
the content they are displaying did not originate from nabble, and instead
came from the piclist or whatever other lists they display, they are not
apparently making money from our posts and do appear to be providing a good
service for others. Our little link is on the bottom of every post anyway,
so in some sense we are spamming for ourselves.

We are a public forum: I got no problems...

Other admins may feel differently. If anyone can point to any specific
damage or concern, let me know about it.

---
James Newton: PICList webmaster/Admin
@spam@jamesnewtonKILLspamspampiclist.com  1-619-652-0593 phone
http://www.piclist.com/member/JMN-EFP-786
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com




> {Original Message removed}

2005\12\18@052122 by michael brown

picon face
From: "Mike, K8LH



> I am a list member Sir...  Just never opted to receive list postings
via email
> and never really liked the PICList Archive viewer mechanism...

I can't argue with that.  While I really do appreciate MIT for what they
provide, the software running the list leaves very much to be desired.
I really can't fathom how messages go into the list server in one order
and then get delivered in a completely different (and seemingly random)
order.  I often see messages arrive after being delayed for hours,
sometimes days.  At other times, the delay from making a post to me
recieving it can be as low as a minute or two.  I suppose that nabble
would suffer the same problems though.

>I simply discovered Nabble recently and really enjoy the interface much
better...

I have to agree on the better interface.  Many people here don't provide
any context information when they follow up on a post.  That combined
with the inability of OE (and I assume many other e-mail programs) to
indent and show the threaded heirarchy of the messages, makes for some
pretty confusing posts some times.  The nabble interface shows the
threading which really makes reading the piclist a much more efficient
process.  Hmm... maybe I will switch.  ;-)


2005\12\18@060032 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
R Morris (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:

> In our next release, probably in January, we will be adding an option for
> posting only by list members. If the list members and owners prefer this
> option, then let us know and we'll get it changed for the list.

I would like that option to be enabled. But that's with James... :)

Gerhard

2005\12\18@064348 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 12/18/05, Gerhard Fiedler <KILLspamlistsKILLspamspamconnectionbrazil.com> wrote:
> R Morris (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:
>
> > In our next release, probably in January, we will be adding an option for
> > posting only by list members. If the list members and owners prefer this
> > option, then let us know and we'll get it changed for the list.
>
> I would like that option to be enabled. But that's with James... :)
>
> Gerhard

Me too. And please add GNUPIC list as well. But that's with the GNUPIC
list admin.... ;-)

Xiaofan

2005\12\18@100326 by John Ferrell

face picon face
Re:
> I can't argue with that.  While I really do appreciate MIT for what they
> provide, the software running the list leaves very much to be desired.
> I really can't fathom how messages go into the list server in one order
> and then get delivered in a completely different (and seemingly random)
> order.  I often see messages arrive after being delayed for hours,
> sometimes days.  At other times, the delay from making a post to me
> receiving it can be as low as a minute or two.

I first became aware of the protocols used on the internet in the mid
1970's.
I was being trained by IBM as a "Teleprocessing Specialist." The whole
concept of packaging data and sending it over different paths by different
processes running in different physical implementations seemed totally
unworkable and unreasonable to those of us working in the field. The idea of
parts of a transaction arriving out of order via many different routes
seemed unlikely to have any value. We were certain the inmates had assumed
control of the asylum!

For several years the protocol saw little use. IBM (and others) soon
realized the problems were easier dealt with by software fixers than
hardware fixers and my training went mostly unused.

The fact that this whole scheme works as well as it does falls just short of
magic to me!
John Ferrell
http://DixieNC.US

----- Original Message -----
From: "michael brown" <RemoveMEspam-meTakeThisOuTspamhouston.rr.com>
To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <spamBeGonepiclistspamBeGonespammit.edu>
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 5:20 AM
Subject: Re: [OT] sent by Nabble.com?


> From: "Mike, K8LH
>


2005\12\18@125558 by M Graff

flavicon
face
R Morris (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:
> If you look at eh local archive, there's a rating system for posts.
> Any poster rated a 1 will not have any post forwarded to a list. We
> also have some other methods to attempt to address issues like
> spammers whcih are obviously a major problem. In the next release,
> we'll be defaulting to posts only from subscribed members which of
> course puts all the power in the admins hands to ban as the normally
> would.  And as I mentioned, if we have any problems, the admins
> can ask to suspend local posting.

My issues with this response:

(1)  It requires opt-out on the list admin's part, rather than
contacting them and getting approval to host the list as a web forum first.

(2)  It puts the decision of who can post, and under what rules, outside
the list admin's control.

(3)  There seems to be a requirement for the list admin to be part of
nabble.com in order to manage these characteristics.

(4)  Given that nabble.com is, once again, only one example of this type
of email-to-forum system, this sort of IMHO outright rude behavior puts
all the burden of FINDING the list and who to contact, CONTACTING the
web host admins, and ADJUSTING things on the actual list admin's plate.

I really do understand you are trying to offer a useful service.  I
think that if someone who OWNS the list (that is, the actual list admin)
puts it on nabble.com it is a WONDERFUL thing.  I think it's a crappy
thing to "sponsor" it without the actual list admin's knowledge or
concent.  I'm only assuming the pic-list admin didn't put it there, but
I strongly suspect they did not.

--Michael


2005\12\18@133350 by R Morris (sent by Nabble.com)

flavicon
face

Written by  James Newton, Host on 2005-12-17 23:09:

>>Nabble seems to do a reasonable job of hiding email addresses and so is
probably not selling you out to the spammers.

Absolutely, we make quite an effort to hide emails from spam harvesters and we will never make these available for sale or otherwise.

>>Nabble must be subscribed to the list in order to post to the list for their
members. The first time they post some crap or one of their users gets out
of hand, nabbles account will be moderated or just removed. We run the
PICList, and so what gets on it is still very much under our control and our
responsibility.

Your assumption is correct. We only use one email addy for subscription and for posting. This is set to change in the next release whereby we will have a setup option for lists to only allow posts from subscribed members. Members can use their real subscribed email addy or for some lists where it's feasible, we plan to subscribe the user via a unique nabble.com email with their user id. This way we can turn off the automatic email setting for the list for this user and allow the Nabble alerts to be used. In this way, you can moderate a specific user without turning off the entire Nabble archive. We also have implemented some steps to attempt to avoid spammers and problem children before their posts get accepted for a list. I surely know that these won't work perfectly, so we will need feedback to get it right.

Let me reinterate that we can suspend local Nabble posting at any time, so if any problem develop, I'd prefer that you let us know and allow us to take this step rather than moderating the Nabble account as this would turn off the archiving as well. If you prefer, we can do that now and then posting would not be possible via Nabble until we add the subscribed user feature. The next major release for us should be lin late January or February.

>>While it would be a darn good idea if nabble would be a bit more clear that
the content they are displaying did not originate from nabble, and instead
came from the piclist or whatever other lists they display, they are not
apparently making money from our posts and do appear to be providing a good
service for others.

Thank you for the kind comments. I've mentioned this to others, but once again, we only entered minimal information in the list description. We'd welcome your input and would be happy to put anything you like in this field. You can even submit your own changes using the Modify Forum link:

http://www.nabble.com/catalog/ForumEdits.jtp?forum=2059

Just click on the Propose your modification link and enter your revised description.

Rod Morris
Nabble.com

--
Sent from the MicroControllers - PIC forum at Nabble.com:
www.nabble.com/-PIC-Internal-clock-t748357.html#a1999045

2005\12\18@134047 by R Morris (sent by Nabble.com)

flavicon
face

Xiaofan Chen wrote:

Are you saying that you want it added or to have local posting suspended?

It's current;y archived here:

http://www.nabble.com/MicroControllers---GNUPIC-f2057.html

If it's posting that is an issue, then just ask the list admin to contact us and it'll be done.

Rod Morris
Nabble.com

--
Sent from the MicroControllers - PIC forum at Nabble.com:
www.nabble.com/-PIC-Internal-clock-t748357.html#a1999097

2005\12\18@135755 by R Morris (sent by Nabble.com)

flavicon
face

Written by  M Graff on 2005-12-18 09:55:

>(1)  It requires opt-out on the list admin's part, rather than
>contacting them and getting approval to host the list as a web forum first.
>

True. Initially, we did email list admins. As you'd expect, we got ignored. While not the best thing to do, we decided to add lists ourselves to get things jump started and used the gmane.org lists as a starting point as we assumed that list admins would likely not have an issue with us since their lists were already being archived elsewhere. We also thought we could be a better job and prove that we would be useful for the users.

>(2)  It puts the decision of who can post, and under what rules, outside
>the list admin's control.
>

Understood and I've been a strong voice in favor of changing the default to a subscription model. In the next release, this will be the default set up.

>(3)  There seems to be a requirement for the list admin to be part of
>nabble.com in order to manage these characteristics.

They would have to register to make changes themselves. But they can also just email me or respond on the list with requests and I'll make sure that they are done.

>
>snip
>
>I really do understand you are trying to offer a useful service.  I
>think that if someone who OWNS the list (that is, the actual list admin)
>puts it on nabble.com it is a WONDERFUL thing.  I think it's a crappy
>thing to "sponsor" it without the actual list admin's knowledge or
>concent.  I'm only assuming the pic-list admin didn't put it there, but
>I strongly suspect they did not.

You are correct and it wasn't my preference. However, seeking permission hasn't been terribly easy. Right now, we feel that using gmane as a guide has resulted in adding the most active ans useful lists, so we are moving toward a purely opt in model.

Rod Morris
Nabble.com

--
Sent from the MicroControllers - PIC forum at Nabble.com:
www.nabble.com/-PIC-Internal-clock-t748357.html#a1999268

2005\12\18@151120 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
R Morris (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:

> While not the best thing to do, we decided to add lists ourselves to get
> things jump started and used the gmane.org lists as a starting point as
> we assumed that list admins would likely not have an issue with us since
> their lists were already being archived elsewhere. We also thought we
> could be a better job and prove that we would be useful for the users.

> However, seeking permission hasn't been terribly easy. Right now, we feel
> that using gmane as a guide has resulted in adding the most active ans
> useful lists, so we are moving toward a purely opt in model.

If you really would /improve/ on gmane, I don't think anybody would have
had an issue. gmane was never an issue on this list, as it works as
something like a proxy for the list: only people subscribed to the list can
post through gmane, their email appears in the From header as if they were
sending straight emails to the list server, and other than some details in
the headers there is nothing different in a gmane post from a normal email
post.

nabble falls short on this. If you really wanted to improve on gmane, you
should have started with providing the basic set of features gmane provides
-- and then go on to improve on it. As long as you don't handle posts the
same way as the lists in gmane, it's probably a bit arrogant to assume that
if it's ok for gmane to mirror the list it's ok for nabble also. You are
not gmane, and you can't do what gmane does, by design. You knew that, and
chose to ignore the difference. I guess starting out by annoying people
("if they don't want us, we just force them to have us and then deal with
complaints if there are some") is not a good way to make friends. It might
be a way to make money... but that's not my specialty :)

Gerhard

2005\12\18@153834 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>> One, when you go to the nabble site, it doesn't clearly say that
>> the
>> list is not RUN by nabble.com -- in fact, looking at the pages it
> makes
>> every attempt to hide the fact that it isn't.


Why not inform every such "indirect" list poster of the situation and
invite them to join directly? Even if they set mail off they would
then be a bona fide list member with all privileges [ :-) ].



       RM



2005\12\18@165106 by Peter

picon face

On Sun, 18 Dec 2005, John Ferrell wrote:

> The fact that this whole scheme works as well as it does falls just short of
> magic to me!

If you stress the magic a little then it will show you its rear side
pretty quick imho.

Peter

2005\12\18@165204 by M Graff

flavicon
face
R Morris (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:
> Written by  M Graff on 2005-12-18 09:55:
>
>
>>(1)  It requires opt-out on the list admin's part, rather than
>>contacting them and getting approval to host the list as a web forum first.
>>
>
> True. Initially, we did email list admins. As you'd expect, we got ignored.

Did you consider that they were not ignoring you as much as saying "no"
by not responding?

> While not the best thing to do, we decided to add lists ourselves to get
> things jump started and used the gmane.org lists as a starting point
> as we assumed that list admins would likely not have an issue with us
> since their lists were already being archived elsewhere.

Did you consider that they asked gmane or "elsewhere" to do the
archiving, and that doing it in yet another place was not something they
cared for?

Honestly, Yet Another List Archive without any features seems like
you're taking someone else's good words and putting a thin layer of
"added value" around them, and making it look like it's all your idea.

As this is turned into somewhat of an argument, this is the last I'll
say on this topic.  Don't ever archive a list I run; if I want it
archived, I'll request it personally.

--Michael

2005\12\18@193924 by R Morris (sent by Nabble.com)

flavicon
face

>Written by Gerhard Fiedler on 2005-12-18 12:10  

snip..
>
>nabble falls short on this. If you really wanted to improve on gmane, you
>should have started with providing the basic set of features gmane provides
>-- and then go on to improve on it. As long as you don't handle posts the
>same way as the lists in gmane, it's probably a bit arrogant to assume that
>if it's ok for gmane to mirror the list it's ok for nabble also. You are
>not gmane, and you can't do what gmane does, by design. You knew that, and
>chose to ignore the difference.

You're preaching to the choir. Our initial plan was simply to provide an open forum catalog. I won't bore you with the issues of how things evolved into also adding the list archives, but I've been fighting to get the posting methods changed from day 1 because I knew that some lists would object. Others in our group felt that a consistent UI was important for the user, so they didn't want to just cut in a simple mail form like gmane.

By design, we trying to do better than gmane and in a lot of areas, I think we've succeeded. Hopefully, when we get the posting changes done to use a subscription model, you'll agree.

Rod Morris
Nabble.com

--
Sent from the MicroControllers - PIC forum at Nabble.com:
www.nabble.com/-PIC-Internal-clock-t748357.html#a2002424

2005\12\18@234938 by James Newton, Host

face picon face
> WONDERFUL thing.  I think it's a crappy thing to "sponsor" it
> without the actual list admin's knowledge or concent.  I'm
> only assuming the pic-list admin didn't put it there, but I
> strongly suspect they did not.
>
> --Michael

Right. We didn't.

I do feel that if someone put the PIClist on nabble without asking our
admins, they really should take THEIR OWN TIME to make sure the description
is clear on where the list comes from.

But I'm not going to burn any more cycles on it.

'nuff said?

---
James Newton: PICList webmaster/Admin
TakeThisOuTjamesnewtonEraseMEspamspam_OUTpiclist.com  1-619-652-0593 phone
http://www.piclist.com/member/JMN-EFP-786
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com


2005\12\19@060928 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
R Morris (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:

> By design, we trying to do better than gmane and in a lot of areas, I
> think we've succeeded. Hopefully, when we get the posting changes done
> to use a subscription model, you'll agree.

Probably not... :)  I'm a fan of local reading, and I'm a fan of all the
tools a decent newsreader provides for reading lists like this one. No web
interface can give me that better than my newsreader. For searching and
reading way-back posts in archives, gmane does what I need; nabble may be
different, but I don't see anything better.

But when you get the posting interface to work transparently, I'll agree
that there's nothing wrong with it :)

Just out of curiosity: in what areas do you think you do better than gmane
(in mirroring mailing lists)?

Gerhard

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2005 , 2006 only
- Today
- New search...