[Businessmtg] FW: Archiving X

[Steve Rankin]

Hi ASPers,

I'd like to clarify a few things that came up in Jerry's last note as my
perspective is a bit different.


1.  I've described our practice of periodically purging the list of email
addresses that the server sends ASP shares to. Why? For several reasons:

A. It reduces the workload of the server. This is a real issue. As I
mentioned earlier, ASP has had problems in the past with the server sending
out shares VERY slowly when it was overloaded with work. The delays would be
a few minutes at first, then hours. Our provider would do some work on the
server and we would purge the email list to reduce the work load. 

A few years ago, I calculated an estimate of how many people have come
through the doors of ASP. The estimate was around 25,000 and that was a few
years ago. It would be around 30,000 today. What if we kept all of those
email addresses on the server? Well, the server would have bellied up years
ago. So, do we wait until it's clear that the server has problems dealing
with the number of emails it has to send out, or are we going to be
pro-active like we have been in the past?



B. Most mailing list providers charge by the volume of emails sent out. The
formula is simple:
Number of shares X Number of members X days in month = $$$
The formula typically includes tiers based on load. As the load goes up, so
does the rate but the rate goes to a higher rate when moving up a tier. 
The cost of running ASP would increase 3X to 10X if we paid this way. Those
numbers could easily be even higher if ASP had more members than we had when
I was investigating this. 
Additionally, I discovered that providers tend to put limits on list size &
traffic because large and/or active lists means bigger headaches for the
provider.

So we rent an entire server WITHOUT SUPPORT. The good news is that we pay a
fixed monthly rent on the server. The bad news is that the support is
limited to emailing provider AND using the software and services provided.
As the number of emails in our list swells, the probability of needing
support increases. Do we have the expertise to do our own support? Not even
close.  See the next bullet point.



C.  This quote is from the Mailman documentation:

"Conclusion:

"If you're going to be running lists with more than a few hundred members,
you should take a look at the entries on tuning your MTA and Mailman to work
best together. They're in Section 6 of this FAQ."

"If you're going to be running lists with more than a few thousand members,
then you need to have a thorough understanding of how your MTA and Mailman
work, and a deep and intimate familiarity with Internet e-mail in general.
And of course, you will have to carefully consider how best to tune your MTA
and Mailman to work best together. If you're missing any of these
prerequisites, you're in for a difficult time."

NOTE: there are two kinds of lists. Announcement Lists and Discussion Lists.
Quote: "a 10,000-member list that gets a single announcement per week is
much less load than 10 active 1,000-member discussion lists."

The point is that ASP is a busy Discussion List with real potential for
problems as a result of load on the server. 
Does this affect ASP today? On occasion, yes.  Just in the last year or so,
I have seen instances when a post of mine was delayed for as long as 20
minutes. 



D. Lastly, I'll talk about the Al-Anon principle side of this.

Most groups that I've attended have some kind of sign-up sheet that gets
passed around so members can 'sign in' and share their phone number for
others to call. Some groups, such as my f2f home group, maintain a list of
members with their phone numbers that we give to newcomers. The list of
members is probably the closest resemblance to our email list on the server.
Most of the groups I've been in update that list every 6 months or so. Newer
members that have been coming regularly get added and members that we
haven't seen in a while are deleted. However, there was one time when a
couple of members insisted that the group keep anyone and everyone on the
list, even if they hadn't been to the meeting in years, or had only come
once and we'd never seen them again. 

Frankly, I struggle to comprehend what Al-Anon principle might suggest that
we maintain members on a list that don't attend the meeting. 

I compare unsubscribing from ASP to informing a f2f meeting that a member is
leaving. Do we require people to tell us that they are leaving a f2f
meeting? Of course not. They just stop coming to the meeting. Isn't that the
same thing as a member just stopping reading shares and not responding to
ASP emails? 

Do I have the right to continue sending emails to someone after THEY believe
they have left?  No.  



E. Jerry brought up the possibility of ill will directed at ASP. Experience
tells us that this invariably comes from the alcoholic, and is directed at
the member, not the group. OK, so consider this scenario. Jane comes to ASP
seeking help. Jack, the alcoholic is a bit controlling and discovers ASP on
Jane's computer. Jane abandon's ASP but in the insanity of her situation she
doesn't unsubscribe or close that email account - essentially the exact same
thing as not going to another f2f meeting. Not surprising as she's afraid to
do anything. Jack discovers more email from ASP on Jane's computer. Not
good. So, why do we keep people like Jane on the ASP mailing list after they
have essentially left ASP?

Again, do I have the right to continue sending emails to someone after THEY
believe they have left?  Again, the answer is no.  



F. The difficult of unsubscribing. There are two truths that we need to
understand here:

	1. Unsubscribing from ASP is technically easy. 

	2. Unsubscribing can be an insurmountable task for someone in the
throes of the disease. 



G. Jerry's definition of an active email address is quite different from
mine. 

It seems that Jerry's idea is that if an email address does not generate a
bounce message from the server, then it is active. Hmm. I have a Yahoo
address that I created when I moved ASP to eGroups about 20 years ago. Even
though I've never used it since, it is still 'active'. Ditto for the
20-something email addresses that I have created over the last 25 years for
one reason or another. All except maybe 2 or 3 are are still "active" in
Jerry's definition even though I haven't checked them in the last decade. 

My definition is that if someone actually checks the email accumulated, then
it is active. My theory is simple. If no one is home, then why send mail
there?


H. Lastly, there is the issue of our trusted servants making autonomous
decisions.

Yes, it is very true that we give our List Administrator the authority to
make autonomous decisions, but that authority is limited to "as needed". 

And Concept 3 tells us to give trusted servants the authority to do their
jobs. 

Except, I don't believe that "as needed" includes changing practices based
on personal preferences, nor do I believe that the authority referred to in
Concept 3 includes the authority to do more (or differently) than what the
group asked the trusted servant to do. Those are situations where the
trusted servant needs to come to the group and let the group decide. In the
case of ASP, that could be either the Steering Committee or the Business
Meeting, depending on the nature of the issue. Is it strictly
administrative, or is there a policy issue involved? 

Hugs,
Steve