Natalie Maynor  <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
 
>... If somebody asks me which of the two programs I prefer dealing
>with as listowner or as subscriber, I have no trouble at all answering.
>... Is it nuts for me to say which one I prefer?
 
You are entitled to have an opinion, but when advising someone else
as to what might be best for *them*, I think it is important to have
an idea of the dimensions of the issue.  Your own experience may
have little relevance to the circumstances of the other person.
 
As a LISTSERV listowner who has used VM machines since 1983, and
Unix systems since 1987, I must say I prefer the Unix environment.
And, knowing how to use it, I know how to avoid waiting for jobs
to finish.  And I use template files.  Thus, the comparison you
describe is a non-issue for me.  Note:  I am *not* comparing the
two MLMs in question.
 
 
The problem of general public confusion over different MLMs is a
really pervasive one, but I find that when the name of the daemon
is different, people have no trouble accepting that the commands
and features might also be different.  So the use of listproc@site
instead of listserv@site to refer to the (now) Unix ListProcessor
is a *major* improvement.
 
Now, if only more authors of those many Internet guides would
bother to read some of the resources they're always listing,
they might stop confusing the generic concept of an MLM with the
specific implementation known as LISTSERV.  But that's too much
to hope for, I know.
 
The next release (due in a few weeks) of my FAQ, "A Biologist's
Guide to Internet Resources", attempts to address this confusion
directly by specifying what flavor of MLM is used to run each
of the 300 mailing lists that are mentioned, with a short intro
to each MLM.  Perhaps many readers of this newsgroup/mailing list
would find my approach useful.
 
--
        Una Smith                       [log in to unmask]
 
Department of Biology, Yale University, New Haven, CT  06520-8104  USA