> If you subscribed to both groups, wouldn't you receive the same amount of
> email that you would with one group with both topics?
No, because most likely there would be a lot of To: portmaster-users, CC:
portmaster-users-pm3 going on, so you'd end up with a *lot* of duplicate
mail. My prediction is that most people would subscribe to both lists,
just in case something important came across the other list they didn't
normally use (ie to which list would you send a question regarging RADIUS,
or configuring a filter?).
I ran into this same situation while running another quite popular mailing
list. The concensus was that unless there was a very clear distinction
between one mailing list and the other, and a very wide gap between the
interests of one mailing list and the other, any benefits of segregation
would be more than cancelled out by the confusion and additional mail
generated by having two lists.
In this case, there is a pretty strong case to say that the concerns of
the non-PM3 will be quite similar to the concerns of the PM3'ers,
especially considering all they share in common (RADIUS, ComOS 3.5,
similar configurations, etc).
Just my $0.02.
Pete Kruckenberg
pete@inquo.net
> At 06:39 PM 12/23/96 -0500, Stephen Zedalis wrote:
> >
> >I disagree, the PM-3 is not substantially different than the other
> >Portmasters. In fact, with the imminent release of ComOS 3.5 for
> >PM-2s, ORs and IRX, they will be much closer. Plus developments for
> >the PM-3 may give inklings of modifications that could be done on the
> >PM-2's to give them an all-digital upgrade path. I would hate to have
> >to monitor yet another mailing list.