19 Dec
2010
19 Dec
'10
3:40 p.m.
On 12/19/10 10:15 AM, Roger Merchberger wrote:
>> I still think these lists should run in
private servers. Everyone
>> though of Yahoo as a reliable company, that "would just never dies".
>> This is another nail on the coffin. Everything can happen - AND
>> HAPPENS - with a company like yahoo.
>
> This is the way it used to be, there are reasons why almost all lists,
> are now hosted on Yahoo (how many besides this one are hosted
> elsewhere). I can think of one other list I'm still on that is hosted by
> someone other than Yahoo, and it has been dead for about 2 months now (I
> forget how long it was dead the last time).
The reason why many (by no means "all" or "almost all") lists are
hosted by commercial services like Yahoo is that people (misguided
people) seem to think they'll be more stable or better protected from
disappearing. Nothing could be further from the truth...in fact, the
opposite tends to be true. I myself host well over a dozen mailing
lists on my network, some with hundreds of recipients, and even though I
generally take a pretty lackadaisical view of those lists, they've been
in continuous operation for over fifteen years. If I can do it, anyone can.
Corporations? *spit* The suits will do it as long as they think it
makes them money. The second it doesn't, it disappears. Period. It
has happened to countless lists I've been on over the years. I don't
trust anything being run on resources not controlled by someone who
CARES about it for more than just profit.
Depending on the scope of what you want to offer
(archives, etc.) I
would think that you could host a great many lists on modest hardware if
you have the bandwidth available... but that's just me.
I generally don't use hardware that'd be called "modest", but the
resource utilization represented by the lists I host is minimal. It
really doesn't take much at all to handle a mailing list.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL