|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
http://www.egroups.com/group/omega-list
----- Original Message -----
From: "MTG" <mtg1021@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Jim Johnson" <jejohn@xxxxxxxxx>; "Matthew D. Langston"
<langston@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 7:28 AM
Subject: Re: Time to move this list to E-Groups
> what is the name of the new egroup????
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jim Johnson <jejohn@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: Matthew D. Langston <langston@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:25 AM
> Subject: Re: Time to move this list to E-Groups
>
>
> > Thanks, Matt. I just joined the e=group and downloaded the allsyste.ela
> > file. Come to think of it, I didn't even notice the ads
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Matthew D. Langston" <langston@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <the_omega_man@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Omega-List" <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 9:47 AM
> > Subject: Re: Time to move this list to E-Groups
> >
> >
> > > Yes, it can. As an example, I have uploaded Robert Cummings' TS4
> friendly
> > > systems to http://www.egroups.com/files/omega-list/Allsyste.ela.
> > >
> > > Regards, Matt
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: <the_omega_man@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: "Omega-List" <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 5:01 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Time to move this list to E-Groups
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 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.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
|