capability, longevity, usability, accessibility
in one structured doc and put that up in the www instead of posting it here. I think I even caught most points of contributors to this list. Have a look:
> I cannot follow most arguments given in this thread, but the line above.
> It is not about being outdated. Both have their pros and cons. My
> preference of the two would be list, because actually the fastest way to
> search is IN YOUR LOCAL mailbox. If you just put 2 cent worth of your
> brain time in a filter, the list will not clog anything. So this is not
> point. It is at your fingertips at any time, and you can choose to
> neglect to follow while your time is limited, and just come back
> whenever you want. Au contraire, I added the good old "Gloranthan
> Digest" and "Andrew Bell's and Henke Langeveld's RuneQuest Digest" to my
> mailbox and have it searchable! I did never read it in full, but it is
> at my fingertips.
> Having said this, as an old pioneer in internet protocols I would still
> prefer nntp
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_News_Transfer_Protocol which is
> even more "outdated" if you will, but still superiour to any other form
> discussed here. But now, sadly, we come to the point. Kenrae wrote it. I
> am sure, most of you do not even know how to handle an nntp account, and
> most of your ISPs don't offer a server anymore. So we should stick with
> what we think most people can handle. It should be searchable by the
> internet (so far, all varieties are, if you choose to make them public),
> but also searchable within their own system (yahoo is poor here, as
> already noted), but then again I don't like most forums here neither,
> and I would like to have it searchable in my local system.
> MY preference would be
> NNTP - perhaps I would put up a server even, not done that for years.
Powered by hypermail