Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:
Brian Howie wrote:
In message , Stephen Thomas Cole
writes
rickman wrote:
On 12/7/2015 1:59 PM, Brian Howie wrote:
In message ,
Brian Reay writes
Jeff, please feel free to join RSGBTech, a Yahoo group which is
specifically intended for the technical amateurs and those who wish
to learn. It is moderated so the likes of Evans don't get to disrupt
it.
If you would like an invitation, which speeds up the joining
process, drop me an Email. There is a valid address on my website.
There's a rumour on the Yahoo NDB list that the Yahoo groups may be
numbered. Rumour may stem from :-
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ya...SKBN0TN2IC2015
1205 #KMJHucvR0ufqhUcL.97
If Yahoo groups are taken down what are reasonable alternatives?
Usenet.
RFD uk.radio.amateur.rsgbtechgroup.moderated ?
Sounds like a plan, I'll get drafting.
The problem with Usenet is you can't have a repository of files . I
subscribe to the LTSpice and other yahoo groups that have colossal
libraries of useful stuff. Shifting that to Google Groups would be a
nightmare.
Well, couldn't a binaries group do the job? There's NSPs out there offering
10 years or so of retention, so any files dumped into, say,
uk.radio.amateur.rsgbtechgroup.binaries.moderated would be available for a
good long while yet.
Are you absolutely sure the 10 years isn't just text? I would have
thought that a long retention binary server would be a sitting duck for
copyright take-downs. But most of us don't even pay to subscribe to
binary servers with a few weeks' retention, nearly all of us are using
cheap or free text-only servers. And the only way to keep an archive
available to the majority would be to have some people cyclically
reposting the archive. But it might work on that basis.
The modern way is some sort of cloud service but, for practical
purposes, it would have to be advertising funded.
Here's a thought; we set up the ham.* hierarchy. Groups to include;
ham.technical, ham.ragchew, ham.binaries. All moderated, .ragchew
exceedingly light-touch, though. Invest some energy into getting ham.*
carried by the major NSPs and, bosh, we've got a fail safe for when Yahoo
kills Groups.
Ok, you need new binary groups for archiving, but why not use the
existing groups for discussion? They don't have to be in the same
hierarchy.
--
Roger Hayter