🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3heqiv$5k1@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, sdiamond@ucs.indiana.edu
(shirley anne diamond) wrote:
> The idea of reorganizing our listserve as a bit.listserv group sounds
> like a viable idea.  Currently, our legal internship listserve has about
> 100+ subscribers.  What happens is that whenever a decent discussion
> thread gets started some folks can't handle the increased mail traffic
> and are forced to unsubscribe.
> My concern is this.  What happens to those people who remain subscribed
> at the physical listserve location once the listserve is distributed via
> USENET (in the event that all the subscribers are amenable to this
> change).  Will those subscribers receive all of the USENET postings as
> regular e-mail.  According to the FAQ, it appears that physically
> located subscribers will have their posts appear on the USENET.

Yes, and that is a major consideration. People who do not have
access to news will have to subscribe to the list, and the gateway
to usenet will introduce the list/group to thousands of new people.
Not all will post, of course, but some will. This will generate new
new posts to the list. Most will be on subject and of interest to
the subscribers, but there will definitely be more to deal with.
One option for them is to set the DIGEST option so they get one
large piece of e-mail a day instead of dozens of little ones.

> My final concern is how much work will be necessary on the part of my
> local systems administrator?  I almost had to promise him dinner and
> drinks just to set the darned list up.

If you have us do it, it takes about 10-15 minutes of my time. I
can generally schedule it in a day or so after the gateway is approved,
but of course my paid work for The American University comes first.
I don't know how long it would take to set up if you did the gatewaying
at your site. Your system admin would have to research it, get the
gateway code, test it, etc.

Jim McIntosh (jim@american.edu)
The American University
Washington, DC USA 20016-8019