[Coco] Pros and Cons

[Boisy G. Pitre]

On Mar 21, 2005, at 11:41 AM, James Dessart wrote:
>> (2) Tied to Google, the largest search engine in use.
>
> Aren't the list archives?

Yes they are.  As Dennis pointed out, GMANE does indeed archive these 
messages.  However, I think Google Groups is certainly a nice 
interface, and that should be considered too.
>
>> (3) Anyone looking for CoCo related discussions on the Internet can
>> easily find it.
>
> Again, if the list archives can be indexed for search, then it's taken
> care of.
>
> If we want more people to more easily find the mailing list, we need to
> advertise it on all our pages. The more links to it on pages indexed by
> search engines, the better visibility.

Why go through this when Google Groups is (a) already established and 
we've used it before and (b) we are just creating another level that 
people have to go through to find us?

> (2) It's a newsgroup. Modern internet usage does not, for the most 
> part,
> includee newsgroups. It's all web, IM and email. Most people have no 
> clue
> what usenet is.

Much the same as mailing lists.  I would argue that both have about the 
same degree of recognition among people.  However, Google has mass 
acceptance and recognition.
>
>> Pros to maltedmedia:
>> (1) Closed list requiring membership (some might see this as a Con; I
>> do)
>>
>> Cons to maltedmedia:
>> (1) Closed list requiring membership (some might see this as a Pro, 
>> but
>> I don't)
>
> If someone isn't willing to stand up and be counted, why should they be
> allowed to stand up and speak?

Again, I don't see this as the issue, as much as convenience.

>> (2) Not as easily accessible as bit.listserv.coco
>
> Quite the inverse, I'd say. To access newsgroups you need to first 
> have a
> newsgroup client, then a newsgroup server, or to use google's groups
> interface.

Not a big deal.  More people can call up a web browser and set up an 
account than a mail server.  Again, this is a wash.  I don't see one 
being any harder than the other.

>> (3) Not the "traditional" list (may not mean as much to some)
>
> "Traditional" and "out-dated" can sometimes be synonyms. As far as I'm
> concerned, newsgroups have outlived their usefulness.
>

Google is redefining the "usefulness" of newsgroups.  In fact, I think 
Google is the shot in the arm that Usenet needed.

Boisy