16 Jun
2020
16 Jun
'20
5:21 a.m.
With Jay retiring, what are the hosting plans for these mailing lists?
16 Jun
16 Jun
1:15 p.m.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 1:46 PM Al Kossow via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
wrote:
With Jay retiring, what are the hosting plans for
these mailing lists?
Sorry, I missed the news...vcfed.org has a mailing list, maybe someone
there can suggest whether the services they receive are any good. Eric
Klein or Cory Cohen or Mike Brutman are involved with the list, I think.
Maybe Jeff Brace. I am not involved there anymore so I lost touch.
Bill
2:22 p.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> On Behalf Of Bill Degnan via
cctalk
Sent: 16 June 2020 21:16
To: Al Kossow <aek at bitsavers.org>; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-
Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Future of cctalk/cctech
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 1:46 PM Al Kossow via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
wrote:
I missed this too, and I don't seem to be able to find anything in the archive. Where
was this posted?
Regards
Rob
With Jay retiring, what are the hosting plans for
these mailing lists?
Sorry, I missed the news...vcfed.org has a mailing list, maybe someone there
can suggest whether the services they receive are any good. Eric Klein or Cory
Cohen or Mike Brutman are involved with the list, I think.
Maybe Jeff Brace. I am not involved there anymore so I lost touch.
Bill 
3:39 p.m.
We could consider moving to Google groups hosting.
In the wake of the removal of Yahoo many of my groups moved there and it
works really well.
Doug
On Wed, 17 Jun. 2020, 7:22 am Rob Jarratt via cctalk, <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
wrote:
-----Original
Message-----
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> On Behalf Of Bill Degnan
via
cctalk
Sent: 16 June 2020 21:16
To: Al Kossow <aek at bitsavers.org>; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-
Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Future of cctalk/cctech
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 1:46 PM Al Kossow via cctalk <
cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
wrote:
there
With Jay retiring, what are the hosting plans for
these mailing lists?
Sorry, I missed the news...vcfed.org has a mailing list, maybe someone can suggest whether the services they receive are
any good. Eric Klein
or Cory
Cohen or Mike Brutman are involved with the list,
I think.
Maybe Jeff Brace. I am not involved there anymore so I lost touch.
Bill
I missed this too, and I don't seem to be able to find anything in the
archive. Where was this posted?
Regards
Rob
3:45 p.m.
There is also groups.io, and it has some very nice features compared to what yahoo
offered.
Zane
On Jun 16, 2020, at 3:39 PM, Doug Jackson via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
We could consider moving to Google groups hosting.
In the wake of the removal of Yahoo many of my groups moved there and it
works really well.
Doug
5:57 p.m.
On 06/16/2020 05:45 PM, Zane Healy via cctalk wrote:
There is also groups.io, and it has some very nice
features compared to what yahoo offered.
Yes, several other groups I read and contribute to have
moved to groups.io, and they are working quite well and
reliably. Some options require $10 a month to be free from ads.
Jon
10:25 p.m.
Just keep the list here?
It is simple and works..
cheers
On 17 June 2020 at 07:24:16, Lars Brinkhoff via cctalk (cctalk at classiccmp.org) wrote:
Jon Elson wrote:
Yes, several other groups I read and contribute to
have moved to
groups.io, and they are working quite well and reliably. Some options
require $10 a month to be free from ads.
That's a red flag.
11:18 p.m.
Some of us are happy to fire up a vm and host a mailing list. Just saying. But u do have
a point.
K.
On 17 Jun 2020, at 07:57, Al Kossow via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
?On 6/16/20 10:25 PM, Kevin Lee via cctalk wrote:
Just keep the list here?
sure. and when ezwind disappears? 
17 Jun
17 Jun
2:11 p.m.
On Jun 16, 2020, at 10:23 PM, Lars Brinkhoff via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
wrote:
Jon Elson wrote:
Being able to pay a service not to show ads on their web site shows that they're
willing to say "no" to advertisers, which is pretty much the opposite of a red
flag to me.
-- Chris
Yes, several other groups I read and contribute
to have moved to
groups.io, and they are working quite well and reliably. Some options
require $10 a month to be free from ads.
That's a red flag. 
1:29 a.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> On Behalf Of Jon Elson via
cctalk
Sent: 17 June 2020 01:57
To: Zane Healy <healyzh at avanthar.com>; General at ezwind.net;
Discussion at ezwind.net:On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Future of cctalk/cctech
On 06/16/2020 05:45 PM, Zane Healy via cctalk wrote:
Yes, several other groups I read and contribute to have moved to
groups.io,
There is also groups.io, and it has some very
nice features compared to
what yahoo offered.
and they are working quite well and reliably. Some
options require $10 a
month to be free from ads.
There are NO ADVERTISMENTS on groups.io. The subscriptions support the free
groups.
You data is not sold or monetized unless you make the message history public
Some options require a subscription which is $20/month
Others require a huge subscription which is $200/month
Jon
Dave
G4UGM
1:50 a.m.
> > There is also groups.io, and it has some
very nice features compared to
Please please, no groups of any kinds. They're all horrible to use. A
genuine mailing list like this is infinitively easier to keep track of
and read at leisure. Can't stand groups.io. Despise google groups
(always overlaying everything with an insistent suggestion to
translate.. hopeless to navigate if you've been away for a while..
Yahoo, don't mention yahoo. They're all pure junk.
2:58 a.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> On Behalf Of Tor Arntsen via
cctalk
Sent: 17 June 2020 09:50
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Future of cctalk/cctech
Well Yahoo is pretty much a pure mailing list now. They removed all the web stuff. The
only downside is they also removed moderation.
I wonder what you don't like about "groups.io" Its pretty much a pure
mailing list?
Dave
> > There is also groups.io, and it has
some very nice features
> > compared to
Please please, no groups of any kinds. They're all horrible to use. A genuine
mailing list like this is infinitively easier to keep track of and read at leisure.
Can't stand groups.io. Despise google groups (always overlaying everything
with an insistent suggestion to translate.. hopeless to navigate if you've been
away for a while..
Yahoo, don't mention yahoo. They're all pure junk. 
3:53 a.m.
Groups IO? ?is? nice? as? it? allows? image files too.A picture is? worth? a thousand?
words!?Ed#?In a message dated 6/17/2020 2:58:30 AM US Mountain Standard Time, cctalk at
classiccmp.org writes:?
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> On Behalf Of Tor Arntsen via
cctalk
Sent: 17 June 2020 09:50
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Future of cctalk/cctech
Well Yahoo is pretty much a pure mailing list now. They removed all the web stuff. The
only downside is they also removed moderation.
I wonder what you don't like about "groups.io" Its pretty much a pure
mailing list?
Dave?
> > There is also groups.io, and it has
some very nice features
> > compared to
Please please, no groups of any kinds. They're all horrible to use. A genuine
mailing list like this is infinitively easier to keep track of and read at leisure.
Can't stand groups.io. Despise google groups (always overlaying everything
with an insistent suggestion to translate.. hopeless to navigate if you've been
away for a while..
Yahoo, don't mention yahoo. They're all pure junk.
5:55 a.m.
I wonder what you don't like about
"groups.io" Its pretty much a pure mailing list?
Like all of the webby time-wasters, they don't have easy to mirror zipped archives,
because
they want to to spend time hovering around clicking on their sites.
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/
The one thing I would change here is removal of the restriction on attachments.
Well, two things.. Getting rid of the cctalk/cctech split as well.
6:23 a.m.
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 9:11 AM Al Kossow via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
wrote:
I can't imagine Google does not scrape these lists for data mining/sell to
3rd party advertisers and companies who would benefit from it. Having an
independent list means the authors of the content maintain some degree of
ownership. Sure the list is public on the web but at least it's left in
its original form, not parsed and run through a database for sale. I don't
have the time to find out for sure but if I did I bet one would see a
change in the ads that pop up in social media based on the contents of the
user group hosted on Google. That said, if Google paid the author a little
for each post that got a +1 for accuracy/usefulness like sourceforge does,
that might be nice. It's all about having a little say in who uses the
output of my brain. I work by the hour in my day job, I don't give away my
knowledge in skills, that little I have.
Bill
I wonder what you don't like about
"groups.io" Its pretty much a pure
mailing list?
Like all of the webby time-wasters, they don't have easy to mirror zipped
archives, because
they want to to spend time hovering around clicking on their sites.
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/
The one thing I would change here is removal of the restriction on
attachments.
Well, two things.. Getting rid of the cctalk/cctech split as well.
6:45 a.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> On Behalf Of Al Kossow via
cctalk
Sent: 17 June 2020 13:55
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Future of cctalk/cctech
I would agree with both of those too.
Rob
I wonder what you don't like about
"groups.io" Its pretty much a pure mailing
list?
Like all of the webby time-wasters, they don't have easy to mirror zipped
archives, because they want to to spend time hovering around clicking on their
sites.
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/
The one thing I would change here is removal of the restriction on attachments.
Well, two things.. Getting rid of the cctalk/cctech split as well. 
10:28 a.m.
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 02:45:42PM +0100, Rob Jarratt via cctalk wrote:
I concur. And I also would like to mention a simple, easily navigable
web interface to list archives, which works well in text based
browser. Just like the current one. Having such interface is a huge
plus for me. It allows both access to single threads, message by
message, and getting full mbox for more sophisticated processing (in
theory at least, since I have no such needs yet).
"Modern" interfaces, while touting their bestness, are about removing
as much power from end user as possible, IMHO.
--
Regards,
Tomasz Rola
--
** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. **
** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home **
** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... **
** **
** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com **
-----Original
Message-----
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> On Behalf Of Al Kossow via
cctalk
Sent: 17 June 2020 13:55
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Future of cctalk/cctech
I would agree with both of those too.
Rob I wonder what you don't like about
"groups.io" Its pretty much a
pure mailing list?
Like all of the webby time-wasters, they don't have easy to mirror
zipped archives, because they want to to spend time hovering
around clicking on their sites.
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/
The one thing I would change here is removal of the restriction on
attachments.
Well, two things.. Getting rid of the cctalk/cctech split as well. 
10:53 a.m.
New subject: Attachments (was: Re: Future of cctalk/cctech)
On 6/17/20 10:44 AM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
If we remove the restriction on attachments, can we at
least set a size
limit??? I dislike multi-MB attachments.
Or do as some other lists do and simply scrub the attachment and
substitute a URL to where the attachment can be found. Otherwise I
suppose I number in the "If it needs to move, groups.io seems the least
horrible place to go" camp.
--
Christian Kennedy, Ph.D.
chris at mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB00000692 | PG00029419
http://www.mainecoon.com PGP KeyID 108DAB97
PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97
"Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration?"
11:18 a.m.
New subject: Attachments (was: Re: Future of cctalk/cctech)
> If we remove the restriction on attachments, can
we at least set a size
> limit??? I dislike multi-MB attachments.
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020, Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote:
Or do as some other lists do and simply scrub the
attachment and
substitute a URL to where the attachment can be found. Otherwise I
suppose I number in the "If it needs to move, groups.io seems the least
horrible place to go" camp.
"least horrible" seems like a good way to phrase it!
On lists where the participants are not computer literate, groups.io
is/was the logical place to go when the Yahoos made them homeless.
They weren't even aware of the meaning or the Jonathan Swift origin when
they named their company, and it didn't even occur to them to do a search
to find out!
There are people HERE who could probably do a better job, or at
least one more specifically customized to what WE want.
But, we need to be very careful to select a host with adequate resources,
AND stability, not just "I'll have plenty of time to manage it all summer
long." We are looking for DECADES, not months or years.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
1:39 p.m.
New subject: Attachments
On 6/17/2020 11:53 AM, Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote:
On 6/17/20 10:44 AM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
The question is what attachments are needed to send for this list?
Ben.
If we remove the restriction on attachments, can
we at least set a size
limit??? I dislike multi-MB attachments.
Or do as some other lists do and simply scrub the attachment and
substitute a URL to where the attachment can be found. Otherwise I
suppose I number in the "If it needs to move, groups.io seems the least
horrible place to go" camp.
2:50 p.m.
New subject: Attachments
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> On Behalf Of ben via cctalk
Sent: 17 June 2020 21:39
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Attachments
On 6/17/2020 11:53 AM, Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote:
Easy, pictures of unidentified components, sending out schematics that have been reverse
engineered, documentation, pictures of scope traces when trying to find a fault, all
sorts. I would agree on a size limit though.
Regards
Rob
On 6/17/20 10:44 AM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
The question is what attachments are needed to send for this list?
Ben. If we remove the restriction on attachments, can
we at least set a
size limit? I dislike multi-MB attachments.
Or do as some other lists do and simply scrub the attachment and
substitute a URL to where the attachment can be found. Otherwise I
suppose I number in the "If it needs to move, groups.io seems the
least horrible place to go" camp.
18 Jun
18 Jun
2:01 a.m.
New subject: Attachments
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 10:50:20PM +0100, Rob Jarratt via cctalk wrote:
[...]
Easy, pictures of unidentified components, sending out
schematics that have
been reverse engineered, documentation, pictures of scope traces when trying
to find a fault, all sorts. I would agree on a size limit though.
The kind of size limit required to keep attachments small enough to not annoy
people who are not interested in them would be too low for this purpose. The
annoyance increases further when people with broken email clients (or who just
never bothered to learn their tools) include senders' attachments in their
replies.
A typical digicam or scanner produces multi-megabyte files. Reducing them in
size to fit within e.g. a 1MB limit would still cause the same level of
inconvenience to the sender as uploading it somewhere and posting a link as
well as reducing the quality and utility to those who are interested.
I also note an inverse relationship between the size of an email and the
quality of its contents.
Further, an orders-of-magnitude explosion in the resources used by this list
would reduce the number of people willing to host it. My shell server which I
use for mail is perhaps typical: it has a 20TB/month transfer cap which is
effectively infinite, but its 20GB disk would be eventually consumed by all of
those attachments kept forever in the list archives that people also want.
6:56 p.m.
New subject: Attachments
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 5:01 AM Peter Corlett via cctalk <
cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 10:50:20PM +0100, Rob Jarratt
via cctalk wrote:
[...]
This is a tradeoff.
- Allowing, let's say, 50MB attachments would enhance the experience for
some people. I suspect there are many of them on this list.
- Allowing any attachments at all would annoy some people. They tend to
post a lot about how annoyed they would be. I suspect there are fewer of
them than the others.
- Allowing tiny attachments doesn't please anyone.
A typical digicam or scanner produces multi-megabyte files. Reducing them in
Easy, pictures of unidentified components,
sending out schematics that
have
been reverse engineered, documentation, pictures
of scope traces when
trying
to find a fault, all sorts. I would agree on a
size limit though.
The kind of size limit required to keep attachments small enough to not
annoy
people who are not interested in them would be too low for this purpose.
The
annoyance increases further when people with broken email clients (or who
just
never bothered to learn their tools) include senders' attachments in their
replies.
size to fit within e.g. a 1MB limit would still cause
the same level of
inconvenience to the sender as uploading it somewhere and posting a link as
well as reducing the quality and utility to those who are interested.
I also note an inverse relationship between the size of an email and the
quality of its contents
Further, an orders-of-magnitude explosion in the
resources used by this
list
would reduce the number of people willing to host it. My shell server
which I
use for mail is perhaps typical: it has a 20TB/month transfer cap which is
effectively infinite, but its 20GB disk would be eventually consumed by
all of
those attachments kept forever in the list archives that people also want.
A *person* willing to host it is the wrong approach. That makes the truck
number 1.
For redundancy you need to pay a service to host it, and have a few people
with administrative rights.
If people are scared of the service turning down and losing all history,
they can personally archive every message.
17 Jun
17 Jun
12:25 p.m.
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 07:28:22PM +0200, Tomasz Rola via cctalk wrote:
[...]
I concur. And I also would like to mention a simple, easily navigable
web interface to list archives, which works well in text based
browser. Just like the current one. Having such interface is a huge
plus for me. It allows both access to single threads, message by
message, and getting full mbox for more sophisticated processing (in
theory at least, since I have no such needs yet).
As an afterthought, no such mailing list as cctalk/tech would still be
much worse than anything which can put content into my mailbox, be it
gog, io or nntp via some client saving it to disk in a format parsable
via textual MUA (I used to use elm, then pine, now I use mutt, not
perfect but very useful).
--
Regards,
Tomasz Rola
--
** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. **
** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home **
** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... **
** **
** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com **
12:43 p.m.
The one thing I would change here is removal of the
restriction on attachments.
Well, two things.. Getting rid of the cctalk/cctech
split as well.
Amen on that. The first one in particular. As simple as that and you?ve gotten yourself a
very functional yet efficient system.
Marc
1:22 p.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> On Behalf Of Al Kossow via
cctalk
Sent: 17 June 2020 13:55
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Future of cctalk/cctech
As there are no adverts on their site, why would they want you clicking around on the
site? That uses resource and costs them money.
It was primarily envisaged as a mail service. The web side was added because some folks
wanted it.
As a group owner I can download zipped archives of all content.
The ability for members to download the message archive as a zipped file is configurable
by the list owner.
I wonder what you don't like about
"groups.io" Its pretty much a pure
mailing list?
Like all of the webby time-wasters, they don't have easy to mirror zipped
archives, because they want to to spend time hovering around clicking on
their sites.
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/
The one thing I would change here is removal of the restriction on
attachments.
They take up a lot of space.
Well, two things.. Getting rid of the cctalk/cctech
split as well.
I think thats pretty irrelevant .....
Dave
1:35 p.m.
> They take up a lot of space.
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020, William Donzelli via cctalk wrote:
Well, there is some circa 2005 thinking.
2005 was only 15 years ago.
Some of us have pre-Y2K thinking.
Have we finally gotten rid of discussion of a "ten year rule"/"twenty
year rule"?
Is there ANYTHING classic post millenium?
Although I am using a larger drive, I would prefer that we not have any
messages that wouldn't be possible to fit on an 8" SSSD disk.
1:59 p.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech - text encoding
On 6/17/2020 2:35 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
Although I am using a larger drive, I would prefer
that we not have any
messages that wouldn't be possible to fit on an 8" SSSD disk.
Does that include the TAG LINE?
I am happy just to have ASCII text, and trimmed messages.
Does this mailing list have people using EBCDIC for example?
What would be useful is a way to transfer things like paper tape
or punch card deck.
Ben.
2:06 p.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech - text encoding
> Although I am using a larger drive, I would prefer
that we not have any
> messages that wouldn't be possible to fit on an 8" SSSD disk.
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020, ben via cctalk wrote:
Does that include the TAG LINE?
I am happy just to have ASCII text, and trimmed messages.
Does this mailing list have people using EBCDIC for example?
What would be useful is a way to transfer things like paper tape
or punch card deck.
What I would like to see, is an available FILES web location, where people
could put their "please ID this" pictures, and other worthwhile files.
But, links, NOT content, sent out in the email!
If there is enough cheap space, maybe even stuff like the GWBASIC stuff.
Q: is the original Microsoft BASIC paper tape released from copyright,
yet?
Once the plain text rule is lifted, we are likely to also no longer get
ANY trimming of messages, and every post will include everything that ever
came before. All the way back to THIS.
18 Jun
18 Jun
12:04 a.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech - text encoding
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020, ben wrote:
Does this mailing list have people using EBCDIC for
example?
Yes, if for example I use Kermit on the IBM 5110 and connect to a UNIX
host. ;-) But in this case, my Kermit is doing the translation between
ASCII and EBCDIC.
Christian
1:38 a.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech - text encoding
Christian Corti wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020, ben wrote:
Does anyone use ASCII anymore? Most of the emails I get now are marked as
utf-8 with the occasional iso-8859-1.
Regards,
Peter Coghlan.
Does this mailing list have people using EBCDIC
for example?
Yes, if for example I use Kermit on the IBM 5110 and connect to a UNIX
host. ;-) But in this case, my Kermit is doing the translation between
ASCII and EBCDIC. Christian
2:03 a.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech - text encoding
Peter Coghlan wrote:
Does anyone use ASCII anymore?
I read and write my email with Emacs running in a terminal emulator.
I rarely need anything beoynd codepoint 126.
I hear MIT-MC is a popular host for mailing lists. Remind me, is
ARPANET still up and running?
6:34 a.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech - text encoding
On Jun 18, 2020, at 4:03 AM, Lars Brinkhoff via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
Peter Coghlan wrote:
I vote we move the list to an Exchange server behind a SSL VPN and mandate the use of
Outlook, then force all messages to be in quoted-printable encoding. This way nobody
?wins? and everyone is equally miserable. It?s only fair.
Does anyone use ASCII anymore?
I read and write my email with Emacs running in a terminal emulator.
I rarely need anything beoynd codepoint 126. 
20 Jun
20 Jun
9:47 a.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech - text encoding
On 6/18/20 7:34 AM, Daniel Seagraves via cctalk wrote:
I vote we move the list to an Exchange server behind a
SSL VPN
and mandate the use of Outlook, then force all messages to be in
quoted-printable encoding.
I see your quoted-printable and raise you TNEF.
This way nobody ?wins? and everyone is equally
miserable. It?s
only fair.
Are you listening to "The Trees" from Rush?
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
24 Jun
24 Jun
10:02 a.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech - text encoding
Peter Coghlan wrote:
Does anyone use ASCII anymore?
I read and write my email with Emacs running in a terminal emulator.
I rarely need anything beoynd codepoint 126.
10:21 a.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech - text encoding
Someone whose name might be Marc might have written:
I vote we move the list to an Exchange server behind a SSL VPN and mandate
the use of Outlook, then force all messages to be in quoted-printable
encoding. This way nobody ?wins? and everyone is equally miserable.
It?s only fair.
C'mon, quoted-printable is usually fairly readable. How about base-64?
Or if this is regarded as too modern or too universal, how about uuencoding?
Peter Coghlan
wrote:
Does anyone use ASCII anymore?
I read and write my email with Emacs running in a terminal emulator.
I rarely need anything beoynd codepoint 126.
+1 on the Exchange server. You might even be able to have more than 2 people
connected to it at the same time without crashing, if you put enough admins
on the problem.
You can't use an Exchange server. I believe Exchange servers silently
discard messages whose message-id it has previously seen. This would solve
(actually hide) the duplicated messages problem and we can't have that!
But I would strongly suggest that we limit it to using characters from the
Baudot set. If not they don?t print right on my 1930 Teletype.
Also Darwin recently wrote a paper about us, and revoked his theory of
evolution.
Unlike the God-awfull Yahoo Groups, Groups.io works OK for the other lists
I follow. Meaning it?s functional and tolerable, and only moderately
infuriating. But it is certainly not as clean and efficient as this list
by a good margin. It would be good if we could preserve this.
Maybe evolve to the use of pictures or attachments, just to prove Darwin
wrong? Limited to ASCII art only pictures, of course.
Hang on, what about those who prefer their art in upper case EBCDIC only?
Regards,
Peter Coghlan
Marc
11:06 a.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech - text encoding
On 6/24/2020 10:02 AM, Curious Marc via cctalk wrote:
But I would strongly suggest that we limit it to using
characters from the Baudot set. If not they don?t print right on my 1930 Teletype.
I
can peruse the list on my Teletype ASR-32(s).? Can archive the list
with the 5 level paper tape (at least till the three rolls of tape run out).
25 Jun
25 Jun
11:49 a.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech - text encoding
On 6/24/2020 12:06 PM, jim stephens via cctalk wrote:
On 6/24/2020 10:02 AM, Curious Marc via cctalk wrote:
Well if you can trim the posts,and remove sigs,I bet you can don't need
to buy more rolls until the next 5 years.
Are there still places that sell paper tape and paper rolls?
Ben.
But I would strongly suggest that we limit it to
using characters from
the Baudot set. If not they don?t print right on my 1930 Teletype.
I can peruse
the list on my Teletype ASR-32(s).? Can archive the list
with the 5 level paper tape (at least till the three rolls of tape run
out).
17 Jun
17 Jun
1:31 p.m.
>> I wonder what you don't like about
"groups.io" Its pretty much a pure
> mailing list?
> The one thing I would change here is removal of
the restriction on
> attachments.
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020, Dave Wade via cctalk wrote:
They take up a lot of space.
FREE mail lists on groups.io have a size limit. I don't think that it is
a very strenuous limit.
BUT, larger volume, such as ATTACHMENTS, bumps it into having to pay a
subscription fee.
7:20 a.m.
On 06/17/2020 03:50 AM, Tor Arntsen via cctalk wrote:
Well, we have moved the Atlas-Craftsman lathe group from
Yahoo to groups.io last year, and almost everybody uses it
as a mail reflector. I have hardly ever signed on to the
web portal of the thing, except maybe when I initially joined.
Jon
>> There
is also groups.io, and it has some very nice features compared to
Please please, no
groups of any kinds. They're all horrible to use. A
genuine mailing list like this is infinitively easier to keep track of
and read at leisure. Can't stand groups.io. Despise google groups
(always overlaying everything with an insistent suggestion to
translate.. hopeless to navigate if you've been away for a while..
Yahoo, don't mention yahoo. They're all pure junk.
7:46 a.m.
I'm most puzzled by the eager hosting volunteers who'd volunteer even before
they have a full understanding of the job. Wouldn't you want to know
how much time it might take you to administer the list, how much
bandwidth it eats, storage, format of the archives, etc.?
- John
8:15 a.m.
On 2020-06-17 10:46, John Foust via cctalk wrote:
I'm most puzzled by the eager hosting volunteers who'd volunteer even before
they have a full understanding of the job. Wouldn't you want to know
how much time it might take you to administer the list, how much
bandwidth it eats, storage, format of the archives, etc.?
Please don't spoil this discussion with details and facts ;-)
8:27 a.m.
On 6/17/20 7:46 AM, John Foust via cctalk wrote:
I'm most puzzled by the eager hosting volunteers who'd volunteer even before
they have a full understanding of the job.
The list is also something that has existed and will likely exist for decades,
which is another reason not to trust an entity who gives you something for
free on the web
9:05 a.m.
On Jun 17, 2020, at 8:27 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 6/17/20 7:46 AM, John Foust via cctalk wrote:
Early 1997, which brings up a question. Is there a complete archive online anywhere? The
one archive I was using recently to look for some of my posts didn?t go back to the ?97 to
2000 period I needed.
Zane
I'm most puzzled by the eager hosting
volunteers who'd volunteer even before
they have a full understanding of the job.
The list is also something that has existed and will likely exist for decades,
which is another reason not to trust an entity who gives you something for
free on the web 
18 Jun
18 Jun
7:59 a.m.
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 09:46:53AM -0500, John Foust via cctalk wrote:
I'm most puzzled by the eager hosting volunteers who'd volunteer even before
they have a full understanding of the job. Wouldn't you want to know
how much time it might take you to administer the list, how much
bandwidth it eats, storage, format of the archives, etc.?
I can't speak for anyone else, but in my case: I've been running mailing
lists for 35-ish years, so I may have a fairly good handle on the scope.
To address some of those points: administering a migrated mailing
list -- once it's past the transition -- requires very little effort.
How much effort it takes during the transition can be guesstimated via
the number of users and their aggregate clue level, e.g., technical
lists are usually much easier because people on them know how to
speak to Mailman/majordomo/et.al. or can figure it out. Bandwidth is
inconsequential for all but the largest/busiest lists, e.g., thousands of
subscribers X thousands of messages a day. Storage is too: I have decades
of archives of a few thousand mailing lists and they fit comfortably on
a 250G drive without even bothering to compress them.
Archives, if kept in mbox format, are easy to manipulate, combine,
separate, etc. If they're not in mbox format, tools like formail can
assist in making them so. (It's not at all unreasonable for every member
of a mailing list like this one to stash a complete copy of the archive
as insurance.) This isn't entirely pain-free: I run a mailing list with
an approximately 250,000-message archive accumulated over many years
over multiple hosts, and there a few outlier messages that Mailman's
archiver won't process. But: "few", so while it's an annoyance
it's
really quite a minor problem.
---rsk
17 Jun
17 Jun
2:13 p.m.
On Jun 17, 2020, at 1:50 AM, Tor Arntsen via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
wrote:
Do you mean "web forum" where you say "groups?"
>> There is also groups.io, and it has some
very nice features compared to
Please please, no groups of any kinds. They're all horrible to use. A
genuine mailing list like this is infinitively easier to keep track of
and read at leisure. Can't stand groups.io.
I've found the groups.io <http://groups.io/> mailing list mode to be perfectly
reasonable for a number of groups I'm a part of. And it has a forum-like front end for
people who insist on doing everything through a web page.
-- Chris
16 Jun
16 Jun
3:47 p.m.
The S100 list I?m on is there and I agree it works well.
Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> on behalf of Doug Jackson via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 6:39:48 PM
To: rob at jarratt.me.uk <rob at jarratt.me.uk>; Rob Jarratt <robert.jarratt at
ntlworld.com>; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
Cc: Bill Degnan <billdegnan at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Future of cctalk/cctech
We could consider moving to Google groups hosting.
In the wake of the removal of Yahoo many of my groups moved there and it
works really well.
Doug
On Wed, 17 Jun. 2020, 7:22 am Rob Jarratt via cctalk, <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
wrote:
-----Original
Message-----
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> On Behalf Of Bill Degnan
via
cctalk
Sent: 16 June 2020 21:16
To: Al Kossow <aek at bitsavers.org>; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-
Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Future of cctalk/cctech
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 1:46 PM Al Kossow via cctalk <
cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
wrote:
there
With Jay retiring, what are the hosting plans for
these mailing lists?
Sorry, I missed the news...vcfed.org has a mailing list, maybe someone can suggest whether the services they receive are
any good. Eric Klein
or Cory
Cohen or Mike Brutman are involved with the list,
I think.
Maybe Jeff Brace. I am not involved there anymore so I lost touch.
Bill
I missed this too, and I don't seem to be able to find anything in the
archive. Where was this posted?
Regards
Rob
5:13 p.m.
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020, Doug Jackson via cctalk wrote:
We could consider moving to Google groups hosting.
In the wake of the removal of Yahoo many of my groups moved there and it
works really well.
Considering that Jay hosts vastly more than this list, I would be
astonished to find it going anywhere - at least without much advance
warning. I suspect Al is just stirring up shit because he's bored.
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
Some people collect things for a hobby. Geeks collect hobbies.
ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!
17 Jun
17 Jun
12:25 a.m.
On Jun 16, 2020, at 23:27, Christian Corti via cctalk wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020, Doug Jackson wrote:
Oh good, here comes the discussion of which protocol stack this bikeshed should run.
(You can get INN to work with uucp!)
-Frank McConnell
We could consider moving to Google groups
hosting.
No... no no no no no. Never.
Either become a (real) NNTP group or stay as a mailman list. 
16 Jun
16 Jun
2:32 p.m.
On 6/16/2020 6:21 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
With Jay retiring, what are the hosting plans for
these mailing lists?
I've got the ability to host mailman lists or a site if the need is
there - just ask.
I believe some of you know me already from various other places.
--
Brielle Bruns
The Summit Open Source Development Group
http://www.sosdg.org / http://www.ahbl.org
4:43 p.m.
I'd prefer not seeing it on google groups. Although we all know Google
will be around forever, the recent shafting by Yahoo makes me think a
member with a good server would be a lot more reliable.
I could probably gen a mailman instance here on iguana, I know I have
mailman on Alembic but that's a NextStation and is a bit old....
C
On 6/16/2020 5:32 PM, Brielle via cctalk wrote:
On 6/16/2020 6:21 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
With Jay retiring, what are the hosting plans for
these mailing lists?
I've got the ability to host mailman lists or a site if the need is
there - just ask.
I believe some of you know me already from various other places.
4:49 p.m.
Dave McGuire hosts mailing lists on neurotica.com.
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
I'd prefer not seeing it on google groups.
Although we all know Google will
be around forever, the recent shafting by Yahoo makes me think a member with
a good server would be a lot more reliable.
I could probably gen a mailman instance here on iguana, I know I have mailman
on Alembic but that's a NextStation and is a bit old....
C
On 6/16/2020 5:32 PM, Brielle via cctalk wrote:
Mike Loewen mloewen at cpumagic.scol.pa.us
Old Technology http://q7.neurotica.com/Oldtech/
On 6/16/2020 6:21 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk
wrote:
With Jay retiring, what are the hosting plans
for these mailing lists?
I've got the ability to host mailman lists or a site if the need is there
- just ask.
I believe some of you know me already from various other places.
9:13 p.m.
On 6/16/2020 4:43 PM, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
Although we all know Google will be around forever
they destroyed dejanews despite promising to keep it.
A few long threads I discussed things with Tanenbaum and a guy named
Torvalds, gone.
Also some responses from a guy named DMR.
Google.? uh no, not a fan.? Remember google plus?? Google hangouts is
gone this year.? I hold a grudge.? Could go on.? If they get bored with
groups, wonder if they'll do a better job preserving it.
thanks
Jim
9:22 p.m.
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020, 12:13 AM jim stephens via cctalk <
cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 6/16/2020 4:43 PM, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
I hope this group can continue to maintain the same mailer, so that there
is an archive continuity.
I know from my own network that hosting services can be a thankless job,
but hand over the content to a "free" resource is essentially giving away
that which makes this a special, I dependent group.
Bill Degnan
Vintagecomputer.net
Although we all know Google will be around
forever
they destroyed dejanews despite promising to keep it.
A few long threads I discussed things with Tanenbaum and a guy named
Torvalds, gone.
Also some responses from a guy named DMR.
Google. uh no, not a fan. Remember google plus? Google hangouts is
gone this year. I hold a grudge. Could go on. If they get bored with
groups, wonder if they'll do a better job preserving it.
thanks
Jim
11:55 p.m.
On 6/16/2020 4:43 PM, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
Google doesn't have any obligations to keep their services up and running in any ways,
since they are for FREE.
They offer these as long as they contribute to generate income by providing information
from their users.
And why should a multi-national company of that size stick to promises they made in the
past? Unfortunately, ethics and principles don't play much of a role when it comes to
making money for companies of these sizes. It's about revenue in the first place.
I think that we should avoid Google as a host, but that's just my humble opinion.
Unfortunately, I don't have alternatives to come up with except for another mailing
list, since I never tried groups.io.
Cheers,
Pierre
Although we all know Google will be around
forever
they destroyed dejanews despite promising to keep it.
A few long threads I discussed things with Tanenbaum and a guy named
Torvalds, gone.
Also some responses from a guy named DMR.
Google.? uh no, not a fan.? Remember google plus?? Google hangouts is
gone this year.? I hold a grudge.? Could go on.? If they get bored with
groups, wonder if they'll do a better job preserving it. 
9:52 p.m.
Same. Already host a few lists. Can spin up another mailman list in
about 5 minutes.
On 2020-06-16 17:32, Brielle via cctalk wrote:
On 6/16/2020 6:21 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
With Jay retiring, what are the hosting plans for
these mailing lists?
I've got the ability to host mailman lists or a site if the need is
there - just ask.
I believe some of you know me already from various other places.
17 Jun
17 Jun
3:46 p.m.
I'd be happy to host the list at firemountain.net, where a Mailman 2.X
instance has been happily running a few dozen public and private lists for
15-ish years (majordomo before that) (homebrew scripts before that).
No charge, no ads.
If the archives are available in mbox format (or something that can
be massaged into mbox format) I can import all of those.
I would also suggest that -- to future-proof this -- that multiple
people stash those archives and stash future archives as they accrue.
Given archives and a subscriber list, a mailing list can be reconstituted
anywhere.
Merging lists: if the consensus is that it should be done, I can
do that. (Whether that means the subscriber lists, the archives, or both.)
Attachments: that's also do-able if consensus indicates but I recommend
that they be limited to open formats, because delivering messages with
proprietary attachments is a quagmire even if all the recipients want
them. (long explanation omitted) Many years of experience indicate
that doing this and imposing a soft large-but-finite maximum message
size facilitates communication without overwhelming people.
And since someone will ask: I use mutt.
---rsk
25 Jun
25 Jun
1:27 p.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech (comment on address fields) , capturing Discord server traffi
On 6/16/2020 5:21 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
With Jay retiring, what are the hosting plans for
these mailing lists?
I have an observation for when the list migrates.? The current message
"From" field contains the name of the original sender but with the
encoded address of the list as the email address
For example this has
Al Kossow via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Some email clients have a feature which try to automatically capture the
"from" and add them to a local address book.? Thunderbird has 3 layers
(at least) of address books.? The "discovered" email addresses as I
describe here, the local address book if you use it with your manually
added contacts, and finally if you sync it with an outside contact
facility such as Google or another server.
The addresses from these mailings end up with a number of captured
entries in the local address books which don't point back at the actual
sender, but to the list.? I've not had it happen many times, but you do
have to watch using short names (like if I create an email to "al") that
it gets the correct address.
I don't recall what the list used to do, but I know there were changes
made a few years ago which resulted in this. I don't have a criticism,
just an observation to toss in to the mix once the list(s) are migrated
to visit this.? I know Jay tore his hair out then, and appreciate this
isn't a simple problem (maybe others too).
I know Jay mentioned the Discord server which is very active, but I wish
that it could be captured as an archive to be perused in the same way as
the cctalk list (I have all the emails since I joined), the vcf list
(searchable I think mostly by google).? These serve as a great resource,
and I'm not sure that the discord server where such information is
discussed is captured.
thanks
Jim
2:35 p.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech (comment on address fields) , capturing Discord server traffi
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020, jim stephens via cctalk wrote:
I have an observation for when the list migrates.? The
current message "From"
field contains the name of the original sender but with the encoded address of
the list as the email address
For example this has
Al Kossow via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
That has been a nuisance in many ways, however regrettably it seems the
lesser evil in the current world of e-mail infested with DMARC, invented
with little concern as to its impact on mailing lists. Sigh...
Maciej
3:30 p.m.
New subject: Future of cctalk/cctech (comment on address fields) , capturing Discord server traffi
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 2:27 PM jim stephens via cctalk <
cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
The current message
"From" field contains the name of the original sender but with the
encoded address of the list as the email address
Unfortunately now there's no practical way for a mailing list to avoid
rewriting the From header to indicate that the messages are sent from the
list. If you don't do that, many (or most) mail servers (MTAs) will
silently drop the mail due to DKIM/SPF/DMARC failures.
If I send mail from foo at example.com to a classiccmp.org list, and then the
list sends it to all the subscribers _without_ rewriting the From header,
many (or most) receiving MTAs will find that the message fails origin
verification because classiccmp.org can't be validated as a legitimate SMTP
originator for email from example.com.
I'm surprised that use of an "X-Original-From" header or similar isn't
commonly used to work around this. Possibly people may think that it would
help spammers harvest email addresses, but it wouldn't make the harvesting
problem any worse than it was before From rewriting.
Some list software puts the entire original From address in the comment
part of the rewritten From header, rather than only the comment part of the
original.
3:35 p.m.
New subject: Arcnet cards and lost emails!
Hello all,
I had a HDD failure and I lost all of my emails going back 3 years.
There was a gentleman that was looking for Arcnet cards. Could you
please recontact me?
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
1419
days inactive
1428
days old
65 comments
39 participants
participants (39)
-
821＠128.ca -
abuse＠cabal.org.uk -
aek＠bitsavers.org -
alan＠alanlee.org -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
billdegnan＠gmail.com -
bruns＠2mbit.com -
cc＠informatik.uni-stuttgart.de -
cctalk＠beyondthepale.ie -
cctalk＠gtaylor.tnetconsulting.net -
chris＠mainecoon.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
cmhanson＠eschatologist.net -
couryhouse＠aol.com -
curiousmarc3＠gmail.com -
cz＠alembic.crystel.com -
dave.g4ugm＠gmail.com -
doug＠doughq.com -
dseagrav＠lunar-tokyo.net -
elson＠pico-systems.com -
emu＠e-bbes.com -
fmc＠reanimators.org -
geneb＠deltasoft.com -
healyzh＠avanthar.com -
jfoust＠threedee.com -
jwsmail＠jwsss.com -
kspt.tor＠gmail.com -
lars＠nocrew.org -
macro＠linux-mips.org -
mechanic_2＠charter.net -
mloewen＠cpumagic.scol.pa.us -
p.gebhardt＠ymail.com -
rich.cini＠verizon.net -
robert.jarratt＠ntlworld.com -
rsk＠gsp.org -
rtomek＠ceti.pl -
spacewar＠gmail.com -
tony.aiuto＠gmail.com -
wdonzelli＠gmail.com