Re: [webpages-l] vote to remove our pages from genealogy.com ?
At 08:54 PM 12/3/98 +0100, Arthur Teschler wrote:
On Thu, 3 Dec 1998, Richard Heli wrote:
Hmmm, I am not sure. Is it really best to have the pages removed right away? They will not be out of date for a while. Perhaps it would be more useful to leave them until the 21st so that people will at least find something? In the meantime we could publicize on s.g.g that people should change their links?
Just a thought -- what do you think?
I'm afraid most people who visit our pages are not on any mailing list and won't read any of our announcements anyway. If we wait until the 21st we just delay the problem and play Broderbund's cards. If we have our contents deleted now and inform the key sites (Cindy's list, Altavista etc.) about the change, we have the same gap of desinformation but not for Broderbund's profit.
Sorry, I don't understand? These people who are not on any mailing list are not likely to visit the site in the next 2 weeks either. And getting them to update their bookmarks takes even longer. So it makes no difference. Br0derbund will get all kinds of visits no matter what -- we can't stop it. Meanwhile, we may be adding more load to Rainer's server when maybe we should stop spending time on this and instead try to figure out how to get an American server running before the 21st comes or at least as soon as we can. Rick
Arthur.Teschler@uni-giessen.de
1) Do we need an American server immediately? Sure, connect time to Giessen or Kerpen is now slower (even I noticed the difference) but since North Americans pay much lower rates than Europeans do, is the difference that crucial? 2) Newsgroup readers seem to check only for responses to their own queries; I wonder how many noticed Jim's announcement re. the switch from genealogy.com to .net ??? which translates to: I doubt it'll make a difference whether the change is now, on Dec 21 or on Aug 1, 1999. That being said, I'd agree that all pages be removed immediately from genealogy.com/ - why put it off? 3) won't the redirect links be in place until Dec 21st, therefore, is it necessary to keep the pages there as well? (unless I'm not understanding the system?) Besides, Christmas is coming - why not do the work now rather than later this month? Monika ---- On Thu, 3 Dec 1998, Richard Heli wrote:
At 08:54 PM 12/3/98 +0100, Arthur Teschler wrote:
On Thu, 3 Dec 1998, Richard Heli wrote:
Hmmm, I am not sure. Is it really best to have the pages removed right away? They will not be out of date for a while. Perhaps it would be more useful to leave them until the 21st so that people will at least find something? In the meantime we could publicize on s.g.g that people should change their links?
Just a thought -- what do you think?
I'm afraid most people who visit our pages are not on any mailing list and won't read any of our announcements anyway. If we wait until the 21st we just delay the problem and play Broderbund's cards. If we have our contents deleted now and inform the key sites (Cindy's list, Altavista etc.) about the change, we have the same gap of desinformation but not for Broderbund's profit.
Sorry, I don't understand? These people who are not on any mailing list are not likely to visit the site in the next 2 weeks either. And getting them to update their bookmarks takes even longer. So it makes no difference. Br0derbund will get all kinds of visits no matter what -- we can't stop it.
Meanwhile, we may be adding more load to Rainer's server when maybe we should stop spending time on this and instead try to figure out how to get an American server running before the 21st comes or at least as soon as we can.
Rick
Arthur.Teschler@uni-giessen.de
Rick wrote:
... maybe we should stop spending time on this and instead try to figure out how to get an American server running before the 21st comes or at least as soon as we can.
How big of a server do we need? 50 MB disk and 2 GB/month (over redundant OC3) can be had for $25/month without much shopping around. (Sorry, I ignored the discussion of this when Fred Lloyd gave us the statistics.) -- =Jim Eggert EggertJ@LL.mit.edu
participants (3)
-
Jim Eggert
-
Monika Ferrier
-
Richard Heli