[Coco] Re: spam in this list

[jimcox at miba51.com]

Stephen:

There are a lot of CoCo related web sites out there, so 
how about having them provide a link to this list?  Just 
having one or two sites linking to this list will not help 
though, since there would be a chance that someone may 
miss the link. If most of the sites voluntarily listed the 
link and belonged to the CoCo web ring, then it would help 
improve the chance of other CoCo-nuts joining the list and 
strengthening the community.

The CoCo community does not need any more fragmentation, 
but I do believe that this list is the best bet for us 
all.

Jim

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 18:42:01 -0700
  "Stephen H. Fischer" <SFischer1 at MindSpring.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I think we should think about having the Princeton CoCo 
>List server shut
>down, or at least have the link to the UseNet list cut.
>
>What will be the reaction of someone searching for CoCo 
>Lists and finding
>Either the List or the UseNet group and see that ALL of 
>the messages are
>SPAM and not about the CoCo.
>
>We can try and advertise the new Spam free list, but the 
>old ones have so
>many references that they will be found first. The UseNet 
>group CANNOT be
>stopped as there is no one place that owns it. Or am I 
>wrong? The spam
>reduced by cutting the link will help.
>
>CoCo web sites will be a good place to tell Surfers where 
>we are and why,
>but periodic messages to the Princeton list and UseNet 
>group will be lost in
>the flood of Spam I suspect. Any one posting may get 
>several messages
>welcoming them to the new list and suggesting that they 
>not use the old
>lists, or am I wrong about that. What reasons can be made 
>for using the old
>lists now?
>
>Fragmenting the community is not the biggest problem, 
>people seeing so much
>SPAM is. How many messages about people leaving have you 
>read?
>
>The fast dropping of the count of users on the Princeton 
>list has been
>reported.
>
>The un lurking of some people that never posted to the 
>Princeton list is
>continuing at a rapid rate and is a very positive sign.
>
>Maybe we should mine the old list references for user 
>names and sent a
>upbeat message telling them about the new Spam free 
>lists.
>
>I like many others are very happy with the switch 
>already, it just seems to
>be very good. Praise to all involved is befitting.
>
>Stephen H. Fischer <sfischer1 at mindspring.com>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: "Brett K. Heath" <hcmth019 at CSUN.EDU>
>Newsgroups: bit.listserv.coco
>To: <coco at Princeton.EDU>
>Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 2:51 PM
>Subject: Re: spam in this list
>
>
>> On Sun, 19 Oct 2003, Woodrow Hinkleman wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, 19 Oct 2003, Neil wrote:
>> >
>> > > PUCC can't be 'moved', and Usenet doesn't work like 
>>that. That's why
>> > > most of us have changed to coco at maltedmedia.com
>> >
>> > 'most' of us?  Don't count on it.  This is *THE* CoCo 
>>list.  Period.
>> >
>> > Fragmenting what little is left of the community will 
>>kill it faster
>than
>> > anything else will.
>>
>> Agreed!
>>
>> It seems a bit odd that the reason for not asking 
>>Princeton for help with
>> the spam is that we might lose the listserver so as part 
>>of the proposed
>> solution we abandon the listserver!
>>
>> The "decision" to move was precipitous and not well 
>>thought out. Oh well,
>> I hope they enjoy their private little world.
>>
>> Brett K. Heath
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Coco mailing list
>Coco at maltedmedia.com
>http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco