Re: Leaving rasfc
- From: ShellyS <shelly.s@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 09:17:16 -0700 (PDT)
On Apr 25, 11:27 am, nobody <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
ShellyS <shell...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 25, 12:34 am, Remus Shepherd <re...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Tina Hall <Tina_H...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Remus Shepherd <re...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I wonder if there are any other options that people can recommend?Someone could set up a mailing list.
Usenet is 1990's technology. Mailing lists are 1980's technology.
I'd *really* like to see a move to the web.
I've dealt with similar situations in other newsgroups, and for
some reason people on Usenet seem to be allergic to HTML. But web forums
really are the best way to hold conversations these days. Moderation can
be invisible, everyone can join in, trolls can be easily dispatched, etc.
But apparently no one can agree on a forum to migrate to.
Yes! There are so many options. Using LiveJournal was one because so
many folks from here are on it, but it is not ideal and not everyone
likes it. Even with threaded commenting, it's hard to maintain
discussions.
There are still many message board services on the web and software
that lets people set up their own, either with an existing host
service or on their own site/host. There are social networks that
allow the sort of discussions we'd like. I've thought about Ning,
which lets people set up their own social networks, complete with
discussion topics, but I hate the interface. One problem I see is that
no matter what rasfc or any other group migrates to, it would mean
another thing to log into and learn and a lot of people are resistent
to that.
I know there are people who don't have full internet access or low-
speed connections that would make a website difficult for them, which
is probably one of the main reasons usenet is still hanging on.
--Shelly
I think it isn't connection speed that necessarily makes the
difference, most web-based forums are filled with pictures and ads and
javascripts that run indefinitely, none of which is needed for a
text-based discussion. They are also clumsy to navigate, don't
remember what you've seen, and so forth. The potential is there imo
it just isn't realized.
Many people have pointed out they have dial-up or slow connections.
Graphics, scripts, etc, don't load well on such connections. When my
cable was out, I had to go back to dial-up for a week and it was not
fun.
I use the web all the time. I'm always logged into at least 8 sites,
including the photo-heavy flickr. Each site has its own nav issues,
but I usually can learn them well enough within a week and I'm no
techie kid.
There are plenty of web message boards and they tend to follow a
similar format, albeit with different graphics and color schemes,
maybe somewhat different navigation. Some let you customize the
interface and others don't. Others are message boards on social
networks, so they tend to use a format consistent with the main site.
This is an example of a common format:
http://www.sffworld.com/forums/index.php?
I find it very easy to use.
--Shelly
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Leaving rasfc
- From: Catja Pafort
- Re: Leaving rasfc
- From: Brian M. Scott
- Re: Leaving rasfc
- References:
- Re: Leaving rasfc
- From: Remus Shepherd
- Re: Leaving rasfc
- From: Tina Hall
- Re: Leaving rasfc
- From: Remus Shepherd
- Re: Leaving rasfc
- From: ShellyS
- Re: Leaving rasfc
- From: nobody
- Re: Leaving rasfc
- Prev by Date: Re: Leaving rasfc
- Next by Date: Re: Leaving rasfc
- Previous by thread: Re: Leaving rasfc
- Next by thread: Re: Leaving rasfc
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|