|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Can the e-groups site be used simply as a place to post attachments?
In other words, if you have a big message or attachment to send, then send
it to both omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx and omega-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx Those who
are interested in the attachment can go look at the attachment at the egroups
web site. This gives us a place to post attachments without compromising
privacy or forcing banner ads into our messages...
At Thu, 29 Jun 2000 21:04:39 -0700, "Matthew D. Langston" <langston@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
>I agree with you that there are many benefits to using eGroups instead
>of
>the current listserv. In addition to fixing the "file attachment problem",
>it also provides the ability to browse the entire archive of previous
>posts.
>
>Earlier last Spring I reserved two eGroups for this purpose:
>http://www.egroups.com/group/omega-list and
>http://www.egroups.com/group/OmegaResearch. I would be more than happy
>to
>turn them over to the current omega-list listserv moderator(s) if they
>are
>interested (that was the reason why I reserved them in the first place).
>
>I notified the current omega-list listserv moderator as to their
>availability earlier in the Spring, but I haven't heard back from them
>yet.
>
>Regards, Matt
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "M. Simms" <prosys@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: "Omega-List" <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 9:45 PM
>Subject: Time to move this list to E-Groups
>
>
>> I think based on recent posts that mention attachments.....and none
>> appear....
>> and my own frustration of making posts with attachments that don't
>show
>up,
>> it may be time to move the Omega-list to E-Groups or another forum
>venue.
>>
>> The 15k attachment limitation of this listserv is just way too
>restrictive.
>> The fact that there is no notification of this back to the originator
>is
>> also very, very bad.
>>
>> Scanned articles are 50k bytes min....and some systems and indicators
>could
>> climb well above 15k.
>>
>> E-Groups is reliable and has a couple of features like surveys that
>may
>> prove useful.
>> I believe the cost is zero.
>
|