EmailDiscussions.com  

Go Back   EmailDiscussions.com > Discussions about Email Services > Email Comments, Questions and Miscellaneous
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Stay in touch wirelessly

Email Comments, Questions and Miscellaneous Share your opinion of the email service you're using. Post general email questions and discussions that don't fit elsewhere.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 29 Oct 2015, 03:23 AM   #31
David
Ultimate Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Canada.
Posts: 10,355
Usenet is neither superior nor inferior to EMD - it is actually a totally different set of tools. The mail groups (within usenet) contain no specific content regarding the mail services mostly discussed (and represented here) at EMD.
David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 Oct 2015, 07:27 PM   #32
stayaway
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: sweden
Posts: 7
Why is EMD tracking us

Thanks for sharing the information.
stayaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 Oct 2015, 12:40 AM   #33
libCognition
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Usenet is neither superior nor inferior to EMD - it is actually a totally different set of tools.
Usenet (as a tool) is absolutely superior to web-based forums. It's not even close, not in the slightest.

* Web forums require hundreds of thousands of webmasters each securing and maintaining a web server, each of whom must continually secure financing.

* When a walled-garden owner fails to get financing, a whole topic and all its history of archives is lost, leaving a disbanded refugee community at a loss. Contrast that with a usenet server, which carries a large proportion of topics from the 100k+ topics available. If a usenet server were to go down, no single topic suffers a total loss; users simply change servers where they carry on with access to the same content.

* Web forums *duplicate* topics recklessly, dividing the community in ways that is not sensible. It's not sensible to have "emaildiscussions.com>questions" and then to have another walled garden "emailquestions.com>discussion". So while there is duplication in areas where it's foolish to duplicate, there is also *lack* of duplication in use cases where duplication is a /good idea/ (e.g. the previous bullet). Usenet rarely duplicates topics, because each hierarchy has a board that oversees group creation to ensure a sensible division. E.g. in the "comp.*" hierarchy, you would never have a comp.mail.discussion.questions and a comp.mail.questions.discussion. Topic duplication can only span hierarchies, which is rare, but it's a solved problem because the tools merge the content into a single virtual group anyway. So the user experience is not damaged by the division.

* Walled garden owners each have their own rules, which then becomes coupled to the topic. So when a topic is governed by lousy rules and a ruthless moderator, the whole community for that topic is damaged. If the damage exceeds a threshold, then a duplicate topic/community pops up. Either way it's a poor outcome. If poor governance is not poor enough to cause division, then some individuals are forced to live with the repression they experience, or they must not participate (both bad options). If division is justified, then you have all the problems of the division, like needing to check two groups. The poorly governed group will still manage to hoard some unwitting users who would be better served by the other.

* Walled gardens impose labor on the users. Users forced into a proprietary GUI-land must manually point-click-wait-point-click-wait. They are forced to enter human challenges (captchas, solve a math problem, etc) to do various things like create an account or search. And they must create an account for every topic, and maintain the credentials for all of them. Plus the search tool is poorly limited (no regular expressions, no scoring). It's also slow, because all the little raster images and javascript must be downloaded to draw the GUI.

* Web-based forums subject their users to tracking and advertising and all that necessary to secure financing, which has a secondary detrimental effect. Tor (if not blocked by the walled garden) is a minimal form of pseudo-anonymity. While usenet accepts mixmaster messages with strong anonymity and no account needed.

There's no contest here. There are still another dozen or so points, but i'll stop there for now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
The mail groups (within usenet) contain no specific content regarding the mail services mostly discussed (and represented here) at EMD.
comp.mail.misc is scoped to cover EMD discussion.

There are some groups specific to yahoo, and gmail and the like. But discussion of most services would go in comp.mail.misc. If the group were to become high volume, then someone might propose a "comp.mail.services" to create some sensible division. But with the current low volume it would not make sense.

Last edited by libCognition : 30 Oct 2015 at 12:48 AM.
libCognition is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 Oct 2015, 01:01 AM   #34
David
Ultimate Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Canada.
Posts: 10,355
Thanks libCognition: I have used Usenet since the beginning and do not disagree with you.The points you make though do reinforce my belief that EMD and Usenet are not even similar services - they are in fact a different kettle of fish.
David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 Oct 2015, 01:17 AM   #35
libCognition
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Thanks libCognition: I have used Usenet since the beginning and do not disagree with you.The points you make though do reinforce my belief that EMD and Usenet are not even similar services - they are in fact a different kettle of fish.
This thread exists because people are choosing the wrong kettle of fish. There's a better kettle fish, and users should be aware of it. The first port of call should be the better fish kettle, feeding from the other only in desperation (desperation that only exists because the uninformed masses don't know better).
libCognition is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 Oct 2015, 01:59 AM   #36
David
Ultimate Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Canada.
Posts: 10,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by libCognition View Post
This thread exists because people are choosing the wrong kettle of fish. There's a better kettle fish, and users should be aware of it. The first port of call should be the better fish kettle, feeding from the other only in desperation (desperation that only exists because the uninformed masses don't know better).
Yes, of course: I will say no more.
David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 Feb 2017, 02:42 AM   #37
emebrs
Essential Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 301
Trustworthy web sites do not use Google Analytics. I don't care how common the practice may be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by janusz View Post
Please explain.
My guess is that any argument in favor of using Google Analytics on this web site would break down when weighing the trade-offs and carefully examining the so-called benefits.
emebrs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 Feb 2017, 11:28 PM   #38
digp
Master of the @
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 1,186
A lot of fuss over nothing
digp is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +9. The time now is 09:41 PM.

 

Copyright EmailDiscussions.com 1998-2013. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy