If somebody is curious, - I was able to estimate the number of
the PDML readers. No, it is not the number of PDML subscribers, -
as some people read it on the web-site - via mail-archive interface.
Of course, this number is not exact, and some people don't read regularly,
and some people read ju
Igor Roshchin wrote:
If somebody is curious, - I was able to estimate the number of
the PDML readers. No, it is not the number of PDML subscribers, -
as some people read it on the web-site - via mail-archive interface.
Of course, this number is not exact, and some people don't read regularly,
PPS.
Just in case somebody believed the very last paragraph of my PS
in the original message,.. -
that's... well.. still close to "PS".. and not quite "PBS"...
let's say, just a fantasy.
The rest is true.
And sorry, I forgot to mark it "OT".
Igor
PPPS.
"Just because you are not paranoid doe
. nope.
Right now, we're running right about 500 regular list subs, 400
digest subs, and who knows how many on Mail-archive readers. Judging
from the complaints I get if the archives are slow/dormant, it's in
the hundreds.
Doug
List Guy
now with email capacity again.
On Jan 18, 2006,
Well, there's a difference between subscribers and active readers. Perhaps
Igor was looking at his own web stats on a PESO page or something similar?
Tim
On 1/18/06 14:58, Doug Brewer wrote:
> . nope.
> Right now, we're running right about 500 regular list subs, 400
> digest subs, and who k
On 18/1/06, Igor Roshchin, discombobulated, unleashed:
> I
>simply marked some electrons that are used for sending my
>electronic messages to the list.
yeah I saw those, so I gobbed on them and sent them back.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|ht
Doug,
Wow! Those numbers are quite impressive.
As Tim pointed out, I indeed was referring to the active readers,
and his guess is very close to how I estimated.
Of course that underestimates even the number of readers,
as some people skip some threads.
As a side note, there is probably a good o
I think you're wrong Doug.
Norm
Doug Brewer wrote:
. nope.
Right now, we're running right about 500 regular list subs, 400
digest subs, and who knows how many on Mail-archive readers. Judging
from the complaints I get if the archives are slow/dormant, it's in
the hundreds.
In a message dated 1/18/2006 6:51:27 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
writes:
I myself, subscribe to the digest version to be able to post to the list,
while reading it on the web (and to have a backup for some cases
of mail-archive hickups and peculiarities).
Gmail would probably be a
In a message dated 1/18/2006 6:51:33 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think you're wrong Doug.
Norm
Doug Brewer wrote:
> . nope.
> Right now, we're running right about 500 regular list subs, 400
> digest subs, and who knows how many on Mail-archive readers. Judging
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
