On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, Lucy Lynch wrote: > On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, Etaoin Shrdlu wrote: > > > In another message, William B. Norton wrote: > > > >> I wish we had a metric for the community value of the nanog list. > > > > I think that if the mailing list was moved from merit to its own server, > > and > > out from under the tyranny of majordomo to mailman, that you'd be shocked > > at > > the number of people who find the list valuable. Mailman's subscriber page, > > as you know, allows you to see the list of members, including offering up > > the > > metric of hidden members (i.e.those who don't want their email address > > displayed in that list). > > Majordomo will let you do this as well, it's an owner config option, > and at some point in the past members could who the list. I think there > were issues with address harvesting.
I am also unsure of how well mailman will handle the number of subscribers. > > > Statistics (http://www.nanog.org/liststats.html) tell us how many people > > are > > on the list, and it is significant. This tells us it has an intrinsic value > > (rather than just a value to the top 40 or 50 posters). >
