[clue-admin] study group

[Jed S. Baer]

On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 09:40:42 -0700 (MST)
David L. Willson wrote:

> > And I suppose I would add that at some point, we ought to have enough
> > confidence in each member's ability to make such a decision, and
> > realize that by not being on -announce, he/she might not get some
> > messages. But that could be exactly what's desired.
> 
> Somne arguments:
> 
> I think the belief that all our members are capable of subscribing to
> -announce is unjustifiable.  I met people last night that are committed
> to club, willing to work, receptive to club-related news, and entirely
> unaware of -announce and/or unaware of how mailing lists work.

Be that as it may, it still doesn't, IMHO, justify automatically
opting-in people who don't want to be subscribed.

Also, right at the top of the website is a link for "Contacts". If people
want to ask about CLUE, they can certainly use that to get more info.
Also, the "Who is CLUE?" section links to the e-mail lists. Perhaps that
could be fleshed out?

> I also am unable to imagine why a CLUEbie that is subscribed to any of
> the CLUE lists would want to miss CLUE-related announcements.

Oh, the people who aren't physically in Colorado, so don't attend
meetings, but like the tech discussions?

I don't think it's up to us to assume to know what other people's
intentions are.

> I know people that are too damn lazy to "figure out how" to sign up for
> the list, who still want to "know what's going on".  I was one of them
> for a while.  I'd forget to check the website in the very narrow window
> of topic-availability, and then I'd forget the meeting.  I would have
> been grateful for announcements.

At some point, don't we have to say we've done all we can reasonably do?

> In conclusion: If we want to be "opt-in" purists, we, at least need to
> make it one Hell of a lot easier to opt-in.

The anti-spam feature that was interfering with this has been turned off.
Shouldn't be an issue any longer. (Though we now have the issue of being
a source of auto-responder spam.)

And we really need to be opt-in purists, because if/when Comcast, or
Yahoo, or some other large ISP decides to blacklist us due to complaints,
or somebody decides to complain to VPSlink about us, we had better be
able to say we run only confirmed opt-in. The work that I've done over
the past months on spam issues was the direct result of us getting
temporarily blacklisted, plus a complaint sent to VPSlink.

http://vpslink.com/about/legal/acceptable-use-policy/

Because losing our hosting account entirely would be much worse than
having to sometimes direct people to where to get information.

jed