David Lawley wrote:
> "If you're going to receive email whenever someone makes a contribution
> anyway, isn't it better to receive the text of their contribution in the
> email message instead of a forum URL?"
No you still have to download stuff you don't want, and such mails only come
if you ask for them for a particular thread.
You have to download stuff you don't want on a forum too. By the time your
web browser has finished downloading all the graphics and formatting gunk it
needs to render whatever aesthetic the forum webmaster has chosen, each
screen could (and probably is) a couple of hundred kbytes -- Which is
equivalent to several weeks worth of aus-soaring email, even when we're
at our most wordy and least useful.
Furthermore, all that overhead crud is downloaded each and every time
you read the forum. Your mail client only downloads stuff once (and,
if you're using IMAP and you've checked "Leave mail on server," probably
doesn't download it *at all* unless you choose to read it)
For sheer bandwidth wastage it's pretty hard to beat the noise-to-signal
ratio of a web-based forum. The amount of glitzy crap which needs to
be downloaded to display something which is, ultimately, just plain text
is amazing.
"or you could just tell your mail client to "Sort by thread" and end up with
a result which also matches the description you've posted above."
Agreed but I still would download a stack of mails I am not interested in,
No, with IMAP you'll be downloading a stack of headers you're not interested
in and leaving the actual message text on the server until you read it, unless
you're transitioning to "offline mode".
If a subject really irks you you can click the widget next to it to
"Ignore Thread", after which you won't even download the headers. IMAP's
server-side filtering takes care of the rest.
Perhaps you need a better email client :-)
(and as I show below, the crocodile tears you're crying about downloading
a stack of mails you aren't interested in is actually crap, and there can
be no rational basis for any independent observer to believe that that's
really a serious concern in your mind)
and even though I use filtering to keep them out of my inbox they still have
to be deleted.
If you're living in the 1980's world of POP3, yes. If you're using IMAP
your filtering will be done server-side and you'll never need to download
stuff that you won't want to see.
"... problems which, it must be noted, are not considered outlandish,
unexpected or unduly severe by the Wikipedia editorial team.
i.e., they cope. It's not that hard."
In the last few months they are regarded in the industry as not coping well
at all,
With all due respect, David, "The Register" is not "the industry." It's
the IT press equivalent of a tabloid newspaper, and it solicits hits by
being inflammatory and sensationalist. If you want an accurate rendition
of the state of "the industry," I'd suggest some source other than El Reg.
There are plenty of Wikipedia articles written by the Wikipedia editors
about Wikipedia editorial issues. The only real thing that's changed
over "the last few months" is that publications like The Register have
noticed that Wikipedia exists. So they'll keep posting "The sky is falling"
articles, until a few years pass, we work out that the sky hasn't fallen,
and move on to other fake problems.
Don't take my word for it: See January 11th's personal appeal from
Wikipedia's founder, Jimmy Wales, where he describes the *real* issues
affecting Wikipedia's future:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Personal_Appeal
Editorial problems? They don't rate a mention.
"But forums have no spam control, their user-interfaces are usually total
crap"
Yes ones that do not require registration do have problems, and yes if
aus-soaring archive is the interface you refer to I agree it is crap!
That's an archive, not a forum.
However the forums I use have a very attractive interface, try
www.abxzone.com for example.
Viewing the first page causes 140 Kbytes to be downloaded. That's between
two weeks and three months of normal aus-soaring email activity, so you'll
forgive me if I take your "Waaah, I have to download stuff even if I don't
want to read it!" whinging with a grain of salt. Regardless of how much
crap you don't want to read that comes in via aus-soaring, I'm pretty sure that
it's utterly overwhelmed by the amount you download every single time you
click on a link on www.abxzone.com -- And you think that's an example of
a *good* user interface? Ye gods.
Of course, because it's a dynamic site much of that data cannot be cached,
so that volume of data would need to be downloaded /all the time/.
Earlier on I drew attention to your crocodile tears, and refused to take
you seriously when you complained about downloading unnecessary material.
This is why.
Proper security for registration is required or any forum will be useless.
Even with proper registration you need moderation to remove spam (ask
the mods at http://www.whirlpool.net.au...!) Registration doesn't actually
prevent spam, because it only deters bad behaviour among people who have
accumulated a reputation around their user-id, and who therefore don't
want to lose it. Folks who don't care about reputation just create
disposable login-IDs and spam until a moderator deletes their posts.
I notice you chose not to address these issues in your reply:
> every time you do something on them you need to put up
> with HTTP delays, and you can only use them if you have a live internet
> connection (so road-warriors carrying laptops can't catch-up on forum topics
> while they're travelling, and people paying by the hour for dialup can't
> download everything and read it offline).
They're the kinds of problems which create an "Everyone Is Welcome Except
Anne Woolf" policy, where people on pay-by-the-hour dialup simply can't
use the discussion forum because it takes too long and costs too much.
We get complaints on this mailing list when people waste half a kilobyte
by not trimming 20 lines of quoting; And you're advocating replacing it
with something that downloads 50 - 100 Kbytes almost every time the mouse
is clicked, and where 20 Kbyte graphics like this:
http://www.bjbgraphics.com/images/stuff/signature_gaara_650x150.gif
are encouraged as signatures at the end of every post, and where
reading the text makes your eyes bleed because the colour scheme
on messages like this:
http://www.abxzone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1290152&postcount=8
looks like angry fruit salad.
And that's a *good* user-interface? Ho-ho-ho.
Now, I work for an ISP, and it could be argued that encouraging bandwidth
wastage like this will inspire people to upgrade to our broadband services
so that they can endure the crapflood without dying of old age while they
wait for it to download, but even I draw the line at this!
Three cheers for the mailing list. It downloads in the background so
you don't have to wait for it, it uses about 1% of the bandwidth of the
forum you've helpfully provided as an example, everyone can use whatever
anti-spam system they think works the best, it's threaded, you can ignore
subjects or people who offend your sensibilities, you can read and write
messages while you're offline, it requires hardly any maintenance, and
it's implemented right now, today.
I repeat my previous question: What benefits does an online forum give
that a mailing list doesn't already provide?
- mark
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I tried an internal modem, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
but it hurt when I walked. Mark Newton
----- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 ------------- Fax: +61-8-82231777 -----
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
