[evtech] Re: EVTECH Old vs EVTECH New lists: We need to make a decision as a group.
- From: John Scrivner <john@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: evtech@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, evtech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 08:59:51 -0500
Everyone involved with this effort has had good intentions and has tried to
help out from what I have seen transpire on both Evtech list servers.. I
want to publicly thank all of you who have helped out. I truly appreciate
that everyone of you has cared enough to try to make sure this resource did
not go away. I am new to Evtech. The silver lining in all this is that the
publicity of the list outage drew attention to this resource and led me
here. I am guessing I am not alone. Thank you all.
John Scrivner
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Dan Bentler <dan.bentler48@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> I agree with Martin. All of the messages regarding this went direct to
> trash.
>
> All of you that want to argue and do a committee or whatever - that is fine
> by me - but kindly stop bothering me regarding this.
>
> I do not care how the Post Office gets my mail to me just that mail gets to
> me.
> In a similar manner I could not care how EVTECH gets to me just that it
> does.
>
> Dan Bentler
>
> --- On *Mon, 4/12/10, Martin K <martin.klingensmith@xxxxxxxxx>* wrote:
>
>
> From: Martin K <martin.klingensmith@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [evtech] Re: EVTECH Old vs EVTECH New lists: We need to make a
> decision as a group.
> To: evtech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Monday, April 12, 2010, 7:36 PM
>
>
> Sheer used to utilize my server for some evtech stuff. I had to take that
> server offline and I haven't talked to him in almost 3 years. I'm still
> certainly willing to help EV causes but the bickering really gets on my
> nerves.
> Let's stay on evtech.org for now and put this list on hiatus.
>
> On Apr 12, 2010 10:28 PM,
> "eric@xxxxxxxxx<http://us.mc578.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=eric@xxxxxxxxx>"
> <eric@xxxxxxxxx<http://us.mc578.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=eric@xxxxxxxxx>>
> wrote:
>
> It wasn't for lack of trying. I tracked down and emailed a couple of
> email addresses (which didn't work) others tried calling every phone
> number they could find. The *first* thing that was tried was to get
> the list back up. There wasn't _any_ light at the end of the tunnel,
> and we had no (none, zero, nada) indication that anything would
> change. The only option was to resurrect the list elsewhere.
>
> It's not as if people just shrugged after 5 minutes of the list being
> down and said "screw it, lets's start a new list." People did the
> right thing and tried to contact the administrators, and did
> everything that could reasonably be expected in the situation.
>
> Now, after the fact, in the blazing light of hindsight, people are
> saying that they "see no reason" to abandon the list. Except that
> it's been shown to be somewhat unreliable.
>
> Don't get me wrong; I _really_ don't care if we use the "new," or the
> "old" list, I just want something that works; and that requires some
> sort of redundant safeguards.
>
> One other thing I can't state strongly enough: I appreciate all the
> effort, time and money that sheer & others have put in to making the
> list a reality, and in no way can I fault them for what happened; it
> was an unfortunate confluence of events.
>
> Having said that, I'll put my money where my mouth is: I'm willing to
> offer any help I can with the maintenance of the (old) list. I have
> quite a bit of Linux admin experience, and it appears that evtech.org
> is running Ubuntu.
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Roger Stockton
> <rstockton@xxxxxxxxxxx<http://us.mc578.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=rstockton@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> wrote: > > I don't fault an...
> Set options or unsubscribe at //www.freelists.org/list/evtech Archive
> at http://www.freelists.o...
>
>
>
Other related posts:
