# Choosing a New CSGNet
**URL:** http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532
**Category:** CSG2014
**Created:** [April 3, 2014, 5:20pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532 "2014-04-03T17:20:47Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@rsmarken](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/rsmarken)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2014, 5:20pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/1 "2014-04-03T17:20:47Z")
[From Rick Marken (2014.04.03.1020)]
There are two relatively easy places to move csgnet: Yahoo Groups and Google Groups. Gary Cziko has set up a csgnet group at each site. I think you can check them out by going to:
[https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/csgnet/conversations/messages](https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/csgnet/conversations/messages)
for Yahoo groups and
[https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/csgnet](https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/csgnet)
for Google groups.
At the moment I prefer Google groups because there are no pictorial ads (as there are on Yahoo) and it seemed a bit easier to join (I had to go through signing up for Yahoo which I didn’t have to do with Google but that may be because I’ve already got a Google account).
There are surely other things to consider when deciding on a discussion forum so I want to put this out to the group to see if there are any particular things that are important to consider when picking a forum that I haven’t considered. And maybe it’s not that important to worry about; we can just start a forum somewhere and invite everyone who is currently on the csgnet listserve and see who comes along. Also, any suggestions regarding other possible venues for the csgnet form would be most welcome.
I personally would like a forum that is easy to use, provides a lot of capability in terms of formatting posts and is readily accessible to everyone who might have an interest in continuing the development of the extraordinary legacy of William T. Powers: Perceptual Control Theory.
Best
Rick
> **···**
>
> –
> Richard S. Marken PhD
> [www.mindreadings.com](http://www.mindreadings.com)
> It is difficult to get a man to [understand](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Understand) something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair
---
### Author:  [@\_bara0361](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/_bara0361)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2014, 5:23pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/2 "2014-04-03T17:23:07Z")
I appreciate your investigation in to a way to continue this forum. I’m still following as best I can, and will want to join the new one when you decide which is the best platform.
Thanks again!
\*barb
> **···**
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Richard Marken [rsmarken@gmail.com](mailto:rsmarken@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> > [From Rick Marken (2014.04.03.1020)]
>
> > There are two relatively easy places to move csgnet: Yahoo Groups and Google Groups. Gary Cziko has set up a csgnet group at each site. I think you can check them out by going to:
>
> >
>
> > [https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/csgnet/conversations/messages](https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/csgnet/conversations/messages)
>
> >
>
> > for Yahoo groups and
>
> >
>
> > [https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/csgnet](https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/csgnet)
>
> > for Google groups.
>
> >
>
> > At the moment I prefer Google groups because there are no pictorial ads (as there are on Yahoo) and it seemed a bit easier to join (I had to go through signing up for Yahoo which I didn’t have to do with Google but that may be because I’ve already got a Google account).
>
> >
>
> > There are surely other things to consider when deciding on a discussion forum so I want to put this out to the group to see if there are any particular things that are important to consider when picking a forum that I haven’t considered. And maybe it’s not that important to worry about; we can just start a forum somewhere and invite everyone who is currently on the csgnet listserve and see who comes along. Also, any suggestions regarding other possible venues for the csgnet form would be most welcome.
>
> >
>
> > I personally would like a forum that is easy to use, provides a lot of capability in terms of formatting posts and is readily accessible to everyone who might have an interest in continuing the development of the extraordinary legacy of William T. Powers: Perceptual Control Theory.
>
> >
>
> > Best
>
> >
>
> > Rick
>
> >
>
> > Richard S. Marken PhD
> > [www.mindreadings.com](http://www.mindreadings.com)
> > It is difficult to get a man to [understand](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Understand) something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair
>
> > –
---
### Author:  [@Matti\_Kolu](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/Matti_Kolu)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2014, 10:23am UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/3 "2014-04-04T10:23:34Z")
[From Matti Kolu (2014.04.04.1230 CET)]
Rick Marken (2014.04.03.1020)--
> There are surely other things to consider when deciding on a discussion
> forum so I want to put this out to the group to see if there are any
> particular things that are important to consider when picking a forum that I
> haven't considered.
Let me play the contrarian. The mailing list format works well. The
tone is personal, posters are readily identifiable, there is no spam,
people are free to choose their own interface, and thanks to Dag we
have on-going archiving of all posts. The lack of formatting options
is only a minor issue, and has little to do with whether a post is
hard to read. Many of Powers' posts from the early 1990s are
exceptionally clear, despite being written as plain-text mails. The
use of the time-stamp is not an annoyance, it is a feature. Manually
typing out your name and the date is a mini-ritual, a small gesture of
group membership. It reminds you that you are posting to CSGnet.
Most forums are worse than the current solution. In terms of
platforms, the only interesting alternative that has arisen lately is
Discourse ([http://www.discourse.org](http://www.discourse.org)). It will reach 1.0 this year, and
it is being considered as a mailing list alternative by many groups,
but it has not yet reached a state where it can be used as a complete
mailing list replacement. When it does, it will cost 15-20 dollars per
month in hosting costs to maintain.
When it comes to the importing of old posts, I agree with Martin that
manual curation is a necessity. Not only to get rid of the political
threads and rants, but also because CSGnet has \_in practice\_ been
treated as a closed discussion group: posts intended for a small,
limited audience should not be made widely available on the Internet.
This also raises the issue of whether you want the discussion platform
to be private, public or a mixture of both.
Having an open forum makes it easy for people to find it through
search engines. The threads and posts will become indexed by search
engines. People searching for some obscure reference might stumble
upon the forum in that way. But such a public nature changes the
dynamics of the discussions. Students might be hesitant to ask
"stupid" questions, because those might be found by future employers.
Researchers might be hesitant to post tentative thoughts, if they know
that those will be made available to the public. Papers and pre-prints
are unlikely to be posted as freely as they are in more private
groups. I'm not sure if this is as true today as it once was, but
academics and researchers seem to prefer the more closed nature of
mailing lists.
Matti
---
### Author:  [@FredNickols](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/FredNickols)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2014, 12:09pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/4 "2014-04-04T12:09:17Z")
[From Fred Nickols (2014.04.04.0809 EDT)]
I'm with Matti. Leave it where it is.
Fred Nickols
> From: Matti Kolu [mailto:matti.kolu@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 6:24 AM
> To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
> Subject: Re: Choosing a New CSGNet
>
> [From Matti Kolu (2014.04.04.1230 CET)]
>
> Rick Marken (2014.04.03.1020)--
>
> \> There are surely other things to consider when deciding on a
> \> discussion forum so I want to put this out to the group to see if
> \> there are any particular things that are important to consider when
> \> picking a forum that I haven't considered.
>
> Let me play the contrarian. The mailing list format works well. The tone
is
> personal, posters are readily identifiable, there is no spam, people are
free
> to choose their own interface, and thanks to Dag we have on-going
archiving
> of all posts. The lack of formatting options is only a minor issue, and
has little
> to do with whether a post is hard to read. Many of Powers' posts from the
> early 1990s are exceptionally clear, despite being written as plain-text
mails.
> The use of the time-stamp is not an annoyance, it is a feature. Manually
> typing out your name and the date is a mini-ritual, a small gesture of
group
> membership. It reminds you that you are posting to CSGnet.
>
> Most forums are worse than the current solution. In terms of platforms,
the
> only interesting alternative that has arisen lately is Discourse
> ([http://www.discourse.org](http://www.discourse.org)). It will reach 1.0 this year, and it is being
> considered as a mailing list alternative by many groups, but it has not
yet
> reached a state where it can be used as a complete mailing list
replacement.
> When it does, it will cost 15-20 dollars per month in hosting costs to
maintain.
> When it comes to the importing of old posts, I agree with Martin that
manual
> curation is a necessity. Not only to get rid of the political threads and
rants,
> but also because CSGnet has \_in practice\_ been treated as a closed
> discussion group: posts intended for a small, limited audience should not
be
> made widely available on the Internet.
> This also raises the issue of whether you want the discussion platform to
be
> private, public or a mixture of both.
>
> Having an open forum makes it easy for people to find it through search
> engines. The threads and posts will become indexed by search engines.
> People searching for some obscure reference might stumble upon the forum
> in that way. But such a public nature changes the dynamics of the
> discussions. Students might be hesitant to ask "stupid" questions, because
> those might be found by future employers.
> Researchers might be hesitant to post tentative thoughts, if they know
that
> those will be made available to the public. Papers and pre-prints are
unlikely
> to be posted as freely as they are in more private groups. I'm not sure if
this
> is as true today as it once was, but academics and researchers seem to
prefer
> **···**
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > the more closed nature of mailing lists.
> >
> > Matti
---
### Author:  [@Abbott](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/Abbott)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2014, 3:21pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/5 "2014-04-04T15:21:12Z")
[From Bruce Abbott (2014.04.04.1120 EDT)]
I find Matti's argument persuasive -- we should keep CSGnet as it is.
Bruce
> **···**
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu
> [mailto:csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu] On Behalf Of Matti Kolu
> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 6:24 AM
> To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
> Subject: Re: Choosing a New CSGNet
>
> [From Matti Kolu (2014.04.04.1230 CET)]
>
> Rick Marken (2014.04.03.1020)--
>
> > There are surely other things to consider when deciding on a
> > discussion forum so I want to put this out to the group to see if
> > there are any particular things that are important to consider when
> > picking a forum that I haven't considered.
>
> Let me play the contrarian. The mailing list format works well. The tone is
> personal, posters are readily identifiable, there is no spam, people are
> free to choose their own interface, and thanks to Dag we have on-going
> archiving of all posts. The lack of formatting options is only a minor
> issue, and has little to do with whether a post is hard to read. Many of
> Powers' posts from the early 1990s are exceptionally clear, despite being
> written as plain-text mails. The use of the time-stamp is not an annoyance,
> it is a feature. Manually typing out your name and the date is a
> mini-ritual, a small gesture of group membership. It reminds you that you
> are posting to CSGnet.
>
> Most forums are worse than the current solution. In terms of platforms, the
> only interesting alternative that has arisen lately is Discourse
> ([http://www.discourse.org](http://www.discourse.org)). It will reach 1.0 this year, and it is being
> considered as a mailing list alternative by many groups, but it has not yet
> reached a state where it can be used as a complete mailing list replacement.
> When it does, it will cost 15-20 dollars per month in hosting costs to
> maintain.
>
> When it comes to the importing of old posts, I agree with Martin that manual
> curation is a necessity. Not only to get rid of the political threads and
> rants, but also because CSGnet has \_in practice\_ been treated as a closed
> discussion group: posts intended for a small, limited audience should not be
> made widely available on the Internet.
> This also raises the issue of whether you want the discussion platform to be
> private, public or a mixture of both.
>
> Having an open forum makes it easy for people to find it through search
> engines. The threads and posts will become indexed by search engines. People
> searching for some obscure reference might stumble upon the forum in that
> way. But such a public nature changes the dynamics of the discussions.
> Students might be hesitant to ask "stupid" questions, because those might be
> found by future employers.
> Researchers might be hesitant to post tentative thoughts, if they know that
> those will be made available to the public. Papers and pre-prints are
> unlikely to be posted as freely as they are in more private groups. I'm not
> sure if this is as true today as it once was, but academics and researchers
> seem to prefer the more closed nature of mailing lists.
>
> Matti
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4355 / Virus Database: 3722/7284 - Release Date: 04/01/14
---
### Author:  [@rsmarken](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/rsmarken)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2014, 8:00pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/6 "2014-04-04T20:00:20Z")
[From Rick Marken (2014.04.04.1255)]
> **···**
>
> > Bruce Abbott (2014.04.04.1120 EDT)–
> >
> > I find Matti’s argument persuasive – we should keep CSGnet as it is.
> >
> > Bruce
>
> RM: Me too. Matti’s points were excellent and very articulately made! So I am all for keeping CSGNet exactly as it is, on the uiuc listserve.
>
> RM: I guess what I really wanted to improve was access to the list by people – especially students – who are interested in PCT. I actually don’t know how to tell people to subscribe anymore. What I would like to see is a way to make access to CSGNet easier for people who want to learn about PCT.
>
> RM: I think the way most people might get to PCT is through the PCT “portals”, the main portal now being [PCTWeb.org](http://PCTWeb.org). At that site now is a Facebook icon that takes you to a PCT discussion group on Facebook (which seems to have been essentially inactive for about a year except for one post in January of this year). I would like to see something like that at [PCTWeb.org](http://PCTWeb.org) that lets a person easily subscribe to CSGNet – just by pressing a button.
>
> Matti seems to know more about the CSGNet listserve than I do (and I’m a manager of the listserve yet – yikes!) so maybe you, Matti, could tell us how we might add a simple link Iin CSGNet for people who visit PCT web sites and get interested in PCT. Is there a way to make subscribing to the CSGNet easy? If so, I think Warren should add such a link to [PCTWeb.org](http://PCTWeb.org); I will add it to my [MindReadings.com](http://MindReadings.com) site and others can add it to their PCT related sites.
>
> Again, the goal is to make it easy for students of PCT to get to CSGNet through one of the PCT related portals because I think CSGNet has always been the main “go to” place to learn about PCT on the net – at least in terms of discussions. Until a year ago that was true of CSGNet simply because Bill was on it. But I think it’s still true because we still have, as regular participants, those who have the longest histories with PCT and can probably claim to understand it best.
>
> Best regards
>
> Rick
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > From: csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu
> >
> > [[mailto:csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu](mailto:csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu)] On Behalf Of Matti Kolu
> >
> > Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 6:24 AM
> >
> > To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
> >
> > Subject: Re: Choosing a New CSGNet
>
> > [From Matti Kolu (2014.04.04.1230 CET)]
> >
> > Rick Marken (2014.04.03.1020)–
> >
> > > There are surely other things to consider when deciding on a
> >
> > > discussion forum so I want to put this out to the group to see if
> >
> > > there are any particular things that are important to consider when
> >
> > > picking a forum that I haven’t considered.
> >
> > Let me play the contrarian. The mailing list format works well. The tone is
> >
> > personal, posters are readily identifiable, there is no spam, people are
> >
> > free to choose their own interface, and thanks to Dag we have on-going
> >
> > archiving of all posts. The lack of formatting options is only a minor
> >
> > issue, and has little to do with whether a post is hard to read. Many of
> >
> > Powers’ posts from the early 1990s are exceptionally clear, despite being
> >
> > written as plain-text mails. The use of the time-stamp is not an annoyance,
> >
> > it is a feature. Manually typing out your name and the date is a
> >
> > mini-ritual, a small gesture of group membership. It reminds you that you
> >
> > are posting to CSGnet.
> >
> > Most forums are worse than the current solution. In terms of platforms, the
> >
> > only interesting alternative that has arisen lately is Discourse
> >
> > ([http://www.discourse.org](http://www.discourse.org)). It will reach 1.0 this year, and it is being
> >
> > considered as a mailing list alternative by many groups, but it has not yet
> >
> > reached a state where it can be used as a complete mailing list replacement.
> >
> > When it does, it will cost 15-20 dollars per month in hosting costs to
> >
> > maintain.
> >
> > When it comes to the importing of old posts, I agree with Martin that manual
> >
> > curation is a necessity. Not only to get rid of the political threads and
> >
> > rants, but also because CSGnet has _in practice_ been treated as a closed
> >
> > discussion group: posts intended for a small, limited audience should not be
> >
> > made widely available on the Internet.
> >
> > This also raises the issue of whether you want the discussion platform to be
> >
> > private, public or a mixture of both.
> >
> > Having an open forum makes it easy for people to find it through search
> >
> > engines. The threads and posts will become indexed by search engines. People
> >
> > searching for some obscure reference might stumble upon the forum in that
> >
> > way. But such a public nature changes the dynamics of the discussions.
> >
> > Students might be hesitant to ask “stupid” questions, because those might be
> >
> > found by future employers.
> >
> > Researchers might be hesitant to post tentative thoughts, if they know that
> >
> > those will be made available to the public. Papers and pre-prints are
> >
> > unlikely to be posted as freely as they are in more private groups. I’m not
> >
> > sure if this is as true today as it once was, but academics and researchers
> >
> > seem to prefer the more closed nature of mailing lists.
> >
> > Matti
>
> > * * *
> >
> > No virus found in this message.
> >
> > Checked by AVG - [www.avg.com](http://www.avg.com)
> >
> > Version: 2014.0.4355 / Virus Database: 3722/7284 - Release Date: 04/01/14
>
> –
> Richard S. Marken PhD
> [www.mindreadings.com](http://www.mindreadings.com)
> It is difficult to get a man to [understand](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Understand) something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair
---
### Author:  [@wmansell](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/wmansell)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2014, 9:06pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/7 "2014-04-04T21:06:46Z")
For sure I will add it if people tell me how. Otherwise I can write instructions on how to set up the list serve?
Warren
> **···**
>
> > Bruce Abbott (2014.04.04.1120 EDT)–
> >
> > I find Matti’s argument persuasive – we should keep CSGnet as it is.
> >
> > Bruce
>
> RM: Me too. Matti’s points were excellent and very articulately made! So I am all for keeping CSGNet exactly as it is, on the uiuc listserve.
>
> RM: I guess what I really wanted to improve was access to the list by people – especially students – who are interested in PCT. I actually don’t know how to tell people to subscribe anymore. What I would like to see is a way to make access to CSGNet easier for people who want to learn about PCT.
>
> RM: I think the way most people might get to PCT is through the PCT “portals”, the main portal now being [PCTWeb.org](http://PCTWeb.org). At that site now is a Facebook icon that takes you to a PCT discussion group on Facebook (which seems to have been essentially inactive for about a year except for one post in January of this year). I would like to see something like that at [PCTWeb.org](http://PCTWeb.org) that lets a person easily subscribe to CSGNet – just by pressing a button.
>
> Matti seems to know more about the CSGNet listserve than I do (and I’m a manager of the listserve yet – yikes!) so maybe you, Matti, could tell us how we might add a simple link Iin CSGNet for people who visit PCT web sites and get interested in PCT. Is there a way to make subscribing to the CSGNet easy? If so, I think Warren should add such a link to [PCTWeb.org](http://PCTWeb.org); I will add it to my [MindReadings.com](http://MindReadings.com) site and others can add it to their PCT related sites.
>
> Again, the goal is to make it easy for students of PCT to get to CSGNet through one of the PCT related portals because I think CSGNet has always been the main “go to” place to learn about PCT on the net – at least in terms of discussions. Until a year ago that was true of CSGNet simply because Bill was on it. But I think it’s still true because we still have, as regular participants, those who have the longest histories with PCT and can probably claim to understand it best.
>
> Best regards
>
> Rick
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > From: csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu
> >
> > [[mailto:csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu](mailto:csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu)] On Behalf Of Matti Kolu
> >
> > Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 6:24 AM
> >
> > To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
> >
> > Subject: Re: Choosing a New CSGNet
>
> > [From Matti Kolu (2014.04.04.1230 CET)]
> >
> > Rick Marken (2014.04.03.1020)–
> >
> > > There are surely other things to consider when deciding on a
> >
> > > discussion forum so I want to put this out to the group to see if
> >
> > > there are any particular things that are important to consider when
> >
> > > picking a forum that I haven’t considered.
> >
> > Let me play the contrarian. The mailing list format works well. The tone is
> >
> > personal, posters are readily identifiable, there is no spam, people are
> >
> > free to choose their own interface, and thanks to Dag we have on-going
> >
> > archiving of all posts. The lack of formatting options is only a minor
> >
> > issue, and has little to do with whether a post is hard to read. Many of
> >
> > Powers’ posts from the early 1990s are exceptionally clear, despite being
> >
> > written as plain-text mails. The use of the time-stamp is not an annoyance,
> >
> > it is a feature. Manually typing out your name and the date is a
> >
> > mini-ritual, a small gesture of group membership. It reminds you that you
> >
> > are posting to CSGnet.
> >
> > Most forums are worse than the current solution. In terms of platforms, the
> >
> > only interesting alternative that has arisen lately is Discourse
> >
> > ([http://www.discourse.org](http://www.discourse.org)). It will reach 1.0 this year, and it is being
> >
> > considered as a mailing list alternative by many groups, but it has not yet
> >
> > reached a state where it can be used as a complete mailing list replacement.
> >
> > When it does, it will cost 15-20 dollars per month in hosting costs to
> >
> > maintain.
> >
> > When it comes to the importing of old posts, I agree with Martin that manual
> >
> > curation is a necessity. Not only to get rid of the political threads and
> >
> > rants, but also because CSGnet has _in practice_ been treated as a closed
> >
> > discussion group: posts intended for a small, limited audience should not be
> >
> > made widely available on the Internet.
> >
> > This also raises the issue of whether you want the discussion platform to be
> >
> > private, public or a mixture of both.
> >
> > Having an open forum makes it easy for people to find it through search
> >
> > engines. The threads and posts will become indexed by search engines. People
> >
> > searching for some obscure reference might stumble upon the forum in that
> >
> > way. But such a public nature changes the dynamics of the discussions.
> >
> > Students might be hesitant to ask “stupid” questions, because those might be
> >
> > found by future employers.
> >
> > Researchers might be hesitant to post tentative thoughts, if they know that
> >
> > those will be made available to the public. Papers and pre-prints are
> >
> > unlikely to be posted as freely as they are in more private groups. I’m not
> >
> > sure if this is as true today as it once was, but academics and researchers
> >
> > seem to prefer the more closed nature of mailing lists.
> >
> > Matti
>
> > * * *
> >
> > No virus found in this message.
> >
> > Checked by AVG - [www.avg.com](http://www.avg.com)
> >
> > Version: 2014.0.4355 / Virus Database: 3722/7284 - Release Date: 04/01/14
>
> –
> Richard S. Marken PhD
> [www.mindreadings.com](http://www.mindreadings.com)
> It is difficult to get a man to [understand](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Understand) something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair
---
### Author:  [@Matti\_Kolu](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/Matti_Kolu)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2014, 12:06am UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/8 "2014-04-05T00:06:54Z")
[From Matti Kolu (2014.04.05.0210 CET)]
Matti Kolu (2014.04.04.1230 CET)--
> In terms of
> platforms, the only interesting alternative that has arisen lately is
> Discourse ([http://www.discourse.org](http://www.discourse.org)). It will reach 1.0 this year, and
> it is being considered as a mailing list alternative by many groups,
> but it has not yet reached a state where it can be used as a complete
> mailing list replacement.
I couldn't help myself: I have set-up a temporary Discourse instance on:
[http://dis.loopgain.com/](http://dis.loopgain.com/) or [http://37.139.29.156/](http://37.139.29.156/)
The server is slightly underpowered, and located in Amsterdam, but it
suffices for testing purposes. Reply-via-email is supported, although
not activated at the moment. You can login with an existing Google or
Yahoo account, or choose to create a new account. The forum is a
temporary experiment, so feel free to play around. If you choose to
register, I'll try to increase your "trust levels" or even give you
admin rights if you want, because new users have fairly limited
settings. Note that you can compose a reply while continuing to browse
the forums.
Matti
---
### Author:  [@rsmarken](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/rsmarken)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2014, 12:16am UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/9 "2014-04-05T00:16:40Z")
Thanks Mattie. I’ll have to try it tomorrow because I’m going to a Lakers game now. But how about telling us how to set up a pointer to let people sign on to the CSG net listserv?
Best
Rick
> **···**
>
> On Friday, April 4, 2014, Matti Kolu [matti.kolu@gmail.com](mailto:matti.kolu@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> > [From Matti Kolu (2014.04.05.0210 CET)]
> >
> > Matti Kolu (2014.04.04.1230 CET)–
> >
> > > In terms of
> >
> > > platforms, the only interesting alternative that has arisen lately is
> >
> > > Discourse ([http://www.discourse.org](http://www.discourse.org)). It will reach 1.0 this year, and
> >
> > > it is being considered as a mailing list alternative by many groups,
> >
> > > but it has not yet reached a state where it can be used as a complete
> >
> > > mailing list replacement.
> >
> > I couldn’t help myself: I have set-up a temporary Discourse instance on:
> >
> > [http://dis.loopgain.com/](http://dis.loopgain.com/) or [http://37.139.29.156/](http://37.139.29.156/)
> >
> > The server is slightly underpowered, and located in Amsterdam, but it
> >
> > suffices for testing purposes. Reply-via-email is supported, although
> >
> > not activated at the moment. You can login with an existing Google or
> >
> > Yahoo account, or choose to create a new account. The forum is a
> >
> > temporary experiment, so feel free to play around. If you choose to
> >
> > register, I’ll try to increase your “trust levels” or even give you
> >
> > admin rights if you want, because new users have fairly limited
> >
> > settings. Note that you can compose a reply while continuing to browse
> >
> > the forums.
> >
> > Matti
>
> –
> Richard S. Marken PhD
> [www.mindreadings.com](http://www.mindreadings.com)
> It is difficult to get a man to [understand](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Understand) something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair
---
### Author:  [@rsmarken](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/rsmarken)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2014, 9:44pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/10 "2014-04-05T21:44:54Z")
[From Rick Marken (2014.04.05.1445)]
> **···**
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Warren Mansell [wmansell@gmail.com](mailto:wmansell@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> > For sure I will add it if people tell me how. Otherwise I can write instructions on how to set up the list serve?
> > Warren
>
> Hi Warren
>
> I just added a link at my [MindReadings.com](http://MindReadings.com) site that points people to the CSGNet discussion group and provides a link to subscribe. The link is now on the home page and it’s called
>
> - [PCT Discussion Forum (CSGNet)](http://www.mindreadings.com/csgnet.htm)
>
> When you select this link it takes you to a page that takes toy to the CSGNet subscription page you click on “here” (maybe an icon would be better?). From there it should be just a matter of a person entering their email address to get subscribed.
>
> Let me know if it works OK. It would be best to test it with someone who is not currently signed up on CSGNet. If a person who is subscribed enters an email address it doesn’t hurt anything; the list just says that you are already subscribed and doesn’t change anything.
>
> Anyway, this is what I had in mind for pctweb. org. I would put the pointer to CSGNet in a prominent place on the page, possibly right over where you currently have “Join a Public List…” or just add CSGNet to that section. My preference, of course, would be to just eliminate the pointer to the Facebook PCT site; it wasn’t used much and I think it’s best if we could get everyone who is interested in PCT together in one place.
>
> Please let me (us, really, since we’re one the net) know what you think. And anyone else with ideas about this (I’m looking at you Matti;-) please let me know what you think as well.
>
> Best
>
> Rick
>
> –
> Richard S. Marken PhD
> [www.mindreadings.com](http://www.mindreadings.com)
> It is difficult to get a man to [understand](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Understand) something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair
---
### Author:  [@Matti\_Kolu](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/Matti_Kolu)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2014, 11:27pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/11 "2014-04-05T23:27:07Z")
This will depend on your hosting environment, but you can setup a HTML
signup form on the website and let it pass the submitted form
information (the email address) to a simple mail script (written in
PHP, ASP or Perl) that you host on the website. The mail script sends
a "subscribe mail" to the listserver, and then redirects the visitor
to a thank you page. This way, the visitor never has to leave
pctweb.org (or mindreadings.com). To do this, you have to find out
which server-side languages your web host supports.
If your hosting provider uses Linux, you can use PHP. To test if the
mail functionality is configured properly, upload a text file named
"mailtest.php" with the following contents:
> **···**
>
> On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Richard Marken \ wrote:
>
> > [From Rick Marken (2014.04.05.1445)]
>
> > Please let me (us, really, since we're one the net) know what you think. And
> > anyone else with ideas about this (I'm looking at you Matti;-) please let me
> > know what you think as well.
>
> ---------------
> \ $to = 'rsmarken@gmail.com';
> $from = 'rsmarken@gmail.com';
> $subject = 'SUBSCRIBE csgnet';
> $message = ''";
> $headers = 'From: ' . $from . "\r\n" .
> 'Reply-To: webmaster@example.com' . "\r\n" .
> 'X-Mailer: PHP/' . phpversion();
>
> mail($to, $subject, $message, $headers);
>
> header('Location: thanks.html');
> exit();
> ?\>
> --------------------
> There should be no white space before "\ pctweb.org/mailtest.php or mindreadings.com/mailtest.php should now
> result in a mail being sent to rsmarken@gmail.com, and according to
> the headers, it should look like as if it was sent from
> rsmarken@gmail.com (Gmail might complain that the from field is
> spoofed). If this works, or your hosting providers equivalence of it
> works, the next step is to have a HTML form provide the $from
> variable, and change the $to variable to lists@lists.illinois.edu.
>
> It might take some Googling, but you are essentially just looking for
> how to tie a HTML-form to a self-hosted mail script, written in PHP or
> ASP. Something like this might be what you are looking for:
> [http://codechirps.com/php-email-contact-form-tutorial/](http://codechirps.com/php-email-contact-form-tutorial/)
>
> Make sure that the tutorial contains some functionality for validating
> the information from the form. In the codechirps tutorial, this is
> done by the check\_input function. For most tutorials, you will have to
> add the $headers variable as demonstrated above, as it is typically
> not featured. (Do not confuse the $headers variable with the header()
> function, that redirects the user to the thank you page after the mail
> has been sent.)
>
> Matti
---
### Author:  [@rupert](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/rupert)
#### Post date: [April 6, 2014, 11:53am UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/12 "2014-04-06T11:53:13Z")
Let me play the arian (contra-contrarian).
I disagree with pretty much everything you said Matti.
To me the format does not work well. Plain text is fine but things go haywire when people start quoting. There is little consistency in the way people do it. Some quote with author initials (but then put their own initials for their response), some with indents and some (like this) with quotes at end of message. And when you get deep nested quotes it’s a nightmare to follow!
Forum quoting is restricted in method, so easier to do and clearer to follow.
The timestamp is an unnecessary anachronism, some people don’t bother with it, and, I reckon, it would seem very odd to newcomers. And it is done automatically with a forum.
Virtually all forums I’ve used are better than the current platform which is extremely user-unfriendly. There is no structure to it and users have no choice in what they receive. So they are going to get the interminable, dense discussions on obscure points whether they like it or not. This is likely to put off all but the most dedicated, or masochistic. I should know because I unsubscribed in 2000 because such discussions were filling up my inbox, and it was ten years before I returned!
With a forum you can organise with different subjects (psychology, evolution, robotics etc), nested hierarchically, and have discussion threads within subjects. Users can then choose to subscribe to each subject or discussion of interest or to everything. It is much easier to see what the whole discipline is all about.
There is a lot that can be done to make it accessible to newcomers, which it certainly isn’t at the moment. Such as have introductory or overview posts, and faqs, which mean people don’t have to keep going over the same old points.
Costs should be nothing because a forum could be tagged on to an existing PCT host.
I find out hard to believe that students are going to worry about the questions they ask because of what future employers might think. Anyway the forum could be made non-searchable or fully or partially private or users can use an alias.
How many new people do we get who join and stick around, one per year? One per decade!?
If we are happy with the status quo, the closed shop with the same old faces then stick with the current list.
If, however, we want to attract a new generation of academics and researchers and students to PCT then we need to present the discussions in a way that is easily accessible to them in a way that they are used to viewing information and in a way that is relevant to their own particular interests; a forum format is the way to go.
So get with it daddios!
Rupert
> **···**
>
> On 4 April 2014 15:53:34 GMT+05:30, Matti Kolu [matti.kolu@gmail.com](mailto:matti.kolu@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> > ```auto
> > [From Matti Kolu (2014.04.04.1230 CET)]
> >
> > Rick Marken (2014.04.03.1020)--
> >
> > > There are surely other things to consider when deciding on a discussion
> > > forum so I want to put this out to the group to see if there are any
> > > particular things that are important to consider when picking a forum that I
> > > haven't considered.
> >
> > Let me play the contrarian. The mailing list format works well. The
> > tone is personal, posters are readily identifiable, there is no spam,
> > people are free to choose their own interface, and thanks to Dag we
> > have on-going archiving of all posts. The lack of formatting options
> > is only a minor issue, and has little to do with whether a post is
> > hard to read. Many of Powers' posts from the early 1990s are
> > exceptionally clear, despite being written as plain-text mails. The
> > use of the time-stamp is not an annoyance, it is a feature. Manually
> > typing out your name and the date is a mini-ritual, a small gesture of
> > group membership. It reminds you that you are posting to CSGnet.
> >
> > Most forums are worse than the current solution. In terms of
> > platforms, the only interesting alternative that has arisen lately is
> > Discourse ([http://www.discourse.org](http://www.discourse.org)). It will reach 1.0 this year, and
> > it is being considered as a mailing list alternative by many groups,
> > but it has not yet reached a state where it can be used as a complete
> > mailing list replacement. When it does, it will cost 15-20 dollars per
> > month in hosting costs to maintain.
> >
> > When it comes to the importing of old posts, I agree with Martin that
> > manual curation is a necessity. Not only to get rid of the political
> > threads and rants, but also because CSGnet has _in practice_ been
> > treated as a closed discussion group: posts intended for a small,
> > limited audience should not be made widely available on the Internet.
> > This also raises the issue of whether you want the discussion platform
> > to be private, public or a mixture of both.
> >
> > Having an open forum makes it easy for people to find it through
> > search engines. The threads and posts will become indexed by search
> > engines. People searching for some obscure reference might stumble
> > upon the forum in that way. But such a public nature changes the
> > dynamics of the discussions. Students might be hesitant to ask
> > "stupid" questions, because those might be found by future employers.
> > Researchers might be hesitant to post tentative thoughts, if they know
> > that those will be made available to the public. Papers and pre-prints
> > are unlikely to be posted as freely as they are in more private
> > groups. I'm not sure if this is as true today as it once was, but
> > academics and researchers seem to prefer the more closed nature of
> > mailing lists.
> >
> > Matti
> >
> > ```
>
> –
>
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
---
### Author:  [@amatic](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/amatic)
#### Post date: [April 6, 2014, 2:00pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/13 "2014-04-06T14:00:49Z")
[From Adam Matic 2014.4.6 1600]
Is it possible to do both?
Keep the CSGnet as a semi-public mailing list, but also have an open, searchable forum with selected introductory texts as a place to discuss with newcomers?
I like the structure of a forum with separate subforums and threads in them. Matti has already put up a test forum and linked to it in his last post. I think it looks great. I’m more used to forums like vBulletin, but don’t see a problem with Discourse.
Adam
> **···**
>
> On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Rupert Young [rupert@moonsit.co.uk](mailto:rupert@moonsit.co.uk) wrote:
>
> > Let me play the arian (contra-contrarian).
> >
> > I disagree with pretty much everything you said Matti.
> >
> > To me the format does not work well. Plain text is fine but things go haywire when people start quoting. There is little consistency in the way people do it. Some quote with author initials (but then put their own initials for their response), some with indents and some (like this) with quotes at end of message. And when you get deep nested quotes it’s a nightmare to follow!
> >
> > Forum quoting is restricted in method, so easier to do and clearer to follow.
> >
> > The timestamp is an unnecessary anachronism, some people don’t bother with it, and, I reckon, it would seem very odd to newcomers. And it is done automatically with a forum.
> >
> > Virtually all forums I’ve used are better than the current platform which is extremely user-unfriendly. There is no structure to it and users have no choice in what they receive. So they are going to get the interminable, dense discussions on obscure points whether they like it or not. This is likely to put off all but the most dedicated, or masochistic. I should know because I unsubscribed in 2000 because such discussions were filling up my inbox, and it was ten years before I returned!
> >
> > With a forum you can organise with different subjects (psychology, evolution, robotics etc), nested hierarchically, and have discussion threads within subjects. Users can then choose to subscribe to each subject or discussion of interest or to everything. It is much easier to see what the whole discipline is all about.
> >
> > There is a lot that can be done to make it accessible to newcomers, which it certainly isn’t at the moment. Such as have introductory or overview posts, and faqs, which mean people don’t have to keep going over the same old points.
> >
> > Costs should be nothing because a forum could be tagged on to an existing PCT host.
> >
> > I find out hard to believe that students are going to worry about the questions they ask because of what future employers might think. Anyway the forum could be made non-searchable or fully or partially private or users can use an alias.
> >
> > How many new people do we get who join and stick around, one per year? One per decade!?
> >
> > If we are happy with the status quo, the closed shop with the same old faces then stick with the current list.
> >
> > If, however, we want to attract a new generation of academics and researchers and students to PCT then we need to present the discussions in a way that is easily accessible to them in a way that they are used to viewing information and in a way that is relevant to their own particular interests; a forum format is the way to go.
> >
> > So get with it daddios!
> >
> > Rupert
> >
> > On 4 April 2014 15:53:34 GMT+05:30, Matti Kolu [matti.kolu@gmail.com](mailto:matti.kolu@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> > > ```auto
> > > [From Matti Kolu (2014.04.04.1230 CET)]
> > >
> > > Rick Marken (2014.04.03.1020)--
> > >
> > > > There are surely other things to consider when deciding on a discussion
> > > >
> > > > forum so I want to put this out to the group to see if there are any
> > > > particular things that are important to consider when picking a forum that I
> > > > haven't considered.
> > >
> > > Let me play the contrarian. The mailing list format works well. The
> > >
> > > tone is personal, posters are readily identifiable, there is no spam,
> > > people are free to choose their own interface, and thanks to Dag we
> > > have on-going archiving of all posts. The lack of formatting options
> > > is only a minor issue, and has little to do with whether a post is
> > >
> > > hard to read. Many of Powers' posts from the early 1990s are
> > > exceptionally clear, despite being written as plain-text mails. The
> > > use of the time-stamp is not an annoyance, it is a feature. Manually
> > > typing out your name and the date is a mini-ritual, a small gesture of
> > >
> > > group membership. It reminds you that you are posting to CSGnet.
> > >
> > > Most forums are worse than the current solution. In terms of
> > > platforms, the only interesting alternative that has arisen lately is
> > > Discourse ([http://www.discourse.org](http://www.discourse.org)). It will reach 1.0 this year, and
> > >
> > > it is being considered as a mailing list alternative by many groups,
> > > but it has not yet reached a state where it can be used as a complete
> > > mailing list replacement. When it does, it will cost 15-20 dollars per
> > > month in hosting costs to maintain.
> > >
> > > When it comes to the importing of old posts, I agree with Martin that
> > > manual curation is a necessity. Not only to get rid of the political
> > > threads and rants, but also because CSGnet has _in practice_ been
> > > treated as a closed discussion group: posts intended for a small,
> > >
> > > limited audience should not be made widely available on the Internet.
> > > This also raises the issue of whether you want the discussion platform
> > > to be private, public or a mixture of both.
> > >
> > > Having an open forum makes it easy for people to find it through
> > >
> > > search engines. The threads and posts will become indexed by search
> > > engines. People searching for some obscure reference might stumble
> > > upon the forum in that way. But such a public nature changes the
> > > dynamics of the discussions. Students might be hesitant to ask
> > >
> > > "stupid" questions, because those might be found by future employers.
> > > Researchers might be hesitant to post tentative thoughts, if they know
> > > that those will be made available to the public. Papers and pre-prints
> > >
> > > are unlikely to be posted as freely as they are in more private
> > > groups. I'm not sure if this is as true today as it once was, but
> > > academics and researchers seem to prefer the more closed nature of
> > > mailing lists.
> > >
> > > Matti
> > >
> > > ```
>
> >
>
> > –
> >
> > Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
---
### Author:  [@Abbott](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/Abbott)
#### Post date: [April 6, 2014, 2:57pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/14 "2014-04-06T14:57:34Z")
[From Bruce Abbott (2014.04.06.1055 EDT)]
This may be a setting thing, but the forum page hides under whatever else is
onscreen at the time. When I tried your link from my email, it brought
Internet Explorer (my default browser) up UNDER the email screen. When I
brought the forum to the top, it reverted to hiding under my email page when
I selected an option. When I minimized my email program, I could see that
my "gadgets" on the desktop were on top, obscuring part of the forum page.
(My operating system is Windows Vista, if that matters.)
Bruce
> **···**
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu
> [mailto:csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu] On Behalf Of Matti Kolu
> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 8:07 PM
> To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
> Subject: Re: Choosing a New CSGNet
>
> [From Matti Kolu (2014.04.05.0210 CET)]
>
> Matti Kolu (2014.04.04.1230 CET)--
>
> > In terms of
> > platforms, the only interesting alternative that has arisen lately is
> > Discourse ([http://www.discourse.org](http://www.discourse.org)). It will reach 1.0 this year, and
> > it is being considered as a mailing list alternative by many groups,
> > but it has not yet reached a state where it can be used as a complete
> > mailing list replacement.
>
> I couldn't help myself: I have set-up a temporary Discourse instance on:
> [http://dis.loopgain.com/](http://dis.loopgain.com/) or [http://37.139.29.156/](http://37.139.29.156/)
>
> The server is slightly underpowered, and located in Amsterdam, but it
> suffices for testing purposes. Reply-via-email is supported, although not
> activated at the moment. You can login with an existing Google or Yahoo
> account, or choose to create a new account. The forum is a temporary
> experiment, so feel free to play around. If you choose to register, I'll try
> to increase your "trust levels" or even give you admin rights if you want,
> because new users have fairly limited settings. Note that you can compose a
> reply while continuing to browse the forums.
>
> Matti
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4355 / Virus Database: 3722/7284 - Release Date: 04/01/14
---
### Author:  [@MartinT](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/MartinT)
#### Post date: [April 6, 2014, 3:28pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/15 "2014-04-06T15:28:07Z")
[Martin Taylor 2014.04.06.11.03]
```
[MT] I obviously agree with you and Rupert. Have you checked out the
```
ECACS forum and web site yet ? Let me
check off the comparisons I see between a mailing list with archives
and a forum, using ECACS as an example:
So far as I can see, a forum format has all the advantages of a
mailing list and more, with none of the disadvantages. In a mailing
list with archives, it’s non-trivial to continue a thread that was
dropped five years ago, but on which you have a new idea after
re-reading the thread. It’s non-trivial even to find the thread if
you happen to remember that it happened, and it’s almost impossible
for a new member to come across it and make a contribution from a
new viewpoint.
The old ECACS forum was made with “discusware pro”, but the company
no longer exists to upgrade it and keep up with security threats. So
if there is any interest, I plan to use a commercial company to move
it to the open-source phpBB. The cost of running it is zero apart
from the cost of the move, which is insignificant. Anyway, have a look at it. You might find some of the old threads
interesting, or even illuminating, among all the stuff that isn’t.
Martin
> **···**
>
> > [From Adam Matic 2014.4.6 1600]
>
> >
>
> > Is it possible to do both?
>
> >
>
> > ```
> > Keep the CSGnet as a semi-public mailing list, but also have an
> >
> > ```
> >
> > open, searchable forum with selected introductory texts as a
> > place to discuss with newcomers?
>
> > ```
> > I like the structure of a forum with separate subforums and
> >
> > ```
> >
> > threads in them. Matti has already put up a test forum and
> > linked to it in his last post. I think it looks great. I’m
> > more used to forums like vBulletin, but don’t see a problem
> > with Discourse.
>
> >
>
> > Adam
>
> http:www.ecacs.net
>
> ` List List Archive Forum`
> ` Easy to write on the fly Y
> N/A Y``
>
> ```
> Permit variable message formatting Y N/A
>
> ```
>
> Y
>
> ```
> (e.g. colour to set off different people's contributions in
>
> ```
>
> quoted material)
>
> ```
> ``Requires or induces long quotes``
>
> ```
>
> Y N/A N
>
> ```
> Easy to find old threads N N
>
> ```
>
> Y
>
> ```
> Easy to continue intermittent
>
> development of concepts over years N N
>
> ```
>
> Y
>
> ```
> Searchable content N Y
>
> ```
>
> Y
>
> ```
> Software distribution N N
>
> ```
>
> Y (at least on ECACS)
>
> ```
> Separate out flame wars ? Y
>
> ```
>
> Y (by moderator)
>
> ```
> Limit contributions to members Y Y
>
> ```
>
> Y
>
> ```
> Allow public viewing N Y
>
> ```
>
> Y
>
> ```
> `
>
> ```
>
> > ```
> > On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Rupert
> >
> > ```
> >
> > Young [rupert@moonsit.co.uk](mailto:rupert@moonsit.co.uk)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > ```
> > > Let me play the arian (contra-contrarian).
> > >
> > > I disagree with pretty much everything you said Matti.
> > >
> > > To me the format does not work well. Plain text is fine
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > but things go haywire when people start quoting. There is
> > > little consistency in the way people do it. Some quote
> > > with author initials (but then put their own initials for
> > > their response), some with indents and some (like this)
> > > with quotes at end of message. And when you get deep
> > > nested quotes it’s a nightmare to follow!
> > >
> > > ```
> > > Forum quoting is restricted in method, so easier to do and
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > clearer to follow.
> > >
> > > ```
> > > The timestamp is an unnecessary anachronism, some people
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > don’t bother with it, and, I reckon, it would seem very
> > > odd to newcomers. And it is done automatically with a
> > > forum.
> > >
> > > ```
> > > Virtually all forums I've used are better than the current
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > platform which is extremely user-unfriendly. There is no
> > > structure to it and users have no choice in what they
> > > receive. So they are going to get the interminable, dense
> > > discussions on obscure points whether they like it or not.
> > > This is likely to put off all but the most dedicated, or
> > > masochistic. I should know because I unsubscribed in 2000
> > > because such discussions were filling up my inbox, and it
> > > was ten years before I returned!
> > >
> > > ```
> > > With a forum you can organise with different subjects
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > (psychology, evolution, robotics etc), nested
> > > hierarchically, and have discussion threads within
> > > subjects. Users can then choose to subscribe to each
> > > subject or discussion of interest or to everything. It is
> > > much easier to see what the whole discipline is all about.
> > >
> > > ```
> > > There is a lot that can be done to make it accessible to
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > newcomers, which it certainly isn’t at the moment. Such as
> > > have introductory or overview posts, and faqs, which mean
> > > people don’t have to keep going over the same old points.
> > >
> > > ```
> > > Costs should be nothing because a forum could be tagged on
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > to an existing PCT host.
> > >
> > > ```
> > > I find out hard to believe that students are going to
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > worry about the questions they ask because of what future
> > > employers might think. Anyway the forum could be made
> > > non-searchable or fully or partially private or users can
> > > use an alias.
> > >
> > > ```
> > > How many new people do we get who join and stick around,
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > one per year? One per decade!?
> > >
> > > ```
> > > If we are happy with the status quo, the closed shop with
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > the same old faces then stick with the current list.
> > >
> > > ```
> > > If, however, we want to attract a new generation of
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > academics and researchers and students to PCT then we need
> > > to present the discussions in a way that is easily
> > > accessible to them in a way that they are used to viewing
> > > information and in a way that is relevant to their own
> > > particular interests; a forum format is the way to go.
> > >
> > > ```
> > > So get with it daddios!
> > >
> > > Rupert
> > >
> > > On 4 April 2014 15:53:34
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > GMT+05:30, Matti Kolu \<[matti.kolu@gmail.com](mailto:matti.kolu@gmail.com) \>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > ```auto
> > > >
> > > > [From Matti Kolu (2014.04.04.1230 CET)]
> > > > Rick Marken (2014.04.03.1020)--
> > > > >
> > > > > There are surely other things to consider when deciding on a discussion
> > > > > forum so I want to put this out to the group to see if there are any
> > > > > particular things that are important to consider when picking a forum that I
> > > > > haven't considered.
> > > >
> > > > Let me play the contrarian. The mailing list format works well. The
> > > > tone is personal, posters are readily identifiable, there is no spam,
> > > > people are free to choose their own interface, and thanks to Dag we
> > > > have on-going archiving of all posts. The lack of formatting options
> > > > is only a minor issue, and has little to do with whether a post is
> > > > hard to read. Many of Powers' posts from the early 1990s are
> > > > exceptionally clear, despite being written as plain-text mails. The
> > > > use of the time-stamp is not an annoyance, it is a feature. Manually
> > > > typing out your name and the date is a mini-ritual, a small gesture of
> > > > group membership. It reminds you that you are posting to CSGnet.
> > > > Most forums are worse than the current solution. In terms of
> > > > platforms, the only interesting alternative that has arisen lately is
> > > > Discourse ([http://www.discourse.org](http://www.discourse.org)
> > > > ). It will reach 1.0 this year, and
> > > > it is being considered as a mailing list alternative by many groups,
> > > > but it has not yet reached a state where it can be used as a complete
> > > > mailing list replacement. When it does, it will cost 15-20 dollars per
> > > > month in hosting costs to maintain.
> > > > When it comes to the importing of old posts, I agree with Martin that
> > > > manual curation is a necessity. Not only to get rid of the political
> > > > threads and rants, but also because CSGnet has _in practice_ been
> > > > treated as a closed discussion group: posts intended for a small,
> > > > limited audience should not be made widely available on the Internet.
> > > > This also raises the issue of whether you want the discussion platform
> > > > to be private, public or a mixture of both.
> > > > Having an open forum makes it easy for people to find it through
> > > > search engines. The threads and posts will become indexed by search
> > > > engines. People searching for some obscure reference might stumble
> > > > upon the forum in that way. But such a public nature changes the
> > > > dynamics of the discussions. Students might be hesitant to ask
> > > > "stupid" questions, because those might be found by future employers.
> > > > Researchers might be hesitant to post tentative thoughts, if they know
> > > > that those will be made available to the public. Papers and pre-prints
> > > > are unlikely to be posted as freely as they are in more private
> > > > groups. I'm not sure if this is as true today as it once was, but
> > > > academics and researchers seem to prefer the more closed nature of
> > > > mailing lists.
> > > > Matti
> > > >
> > > > ```
>
> > >
>
> > > ```
> > > --
> > >
> > > Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > excuse my brevity.
>
> >
---
### Author:  [@rsmarken](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/rsmarken)
#### Post date: [April 6, 2014, 6:16pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/16 "2014-04-06T18:16:56Z")
[From Rick Marken (2014.04.06.1115)]
I’ve gotten contentless messages from Martin, Bruce, Matti and Rupert. I presume these a result of testing the subscription link? Is that right? But why on this subject heading?
Best
Rick
> **···**
>
> On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Martin Taylor [mmt-csg@mmtaylor.net](mailto:mmt-csg@mmtaylor.net) wrote:
>
> > This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> –
> Richard S. Marken PhD
> [www.mindreadings.com](http://www.mindreadings.com)
> It is difficult to get a man to [understand](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Understand) something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair
---
### Author:  [@rsmarken](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/rsmarken)
#### Post date: [April 6, 2014, 7:57pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/17 "2014-04-06T19:57:31Z")
I’m trying again.
> **···**
>
> On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Richard Marken [rsmarken@gmail.com](mailto:rsmarken@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> > [From Rick Marken (2014.04.06.1250)]
>
> > OK, I’m completely puzzled. I can read the messaged if I go to the listserve site itself but I’m no longer getting the messages with content. As far as I can tell there was no change in how I am set up to receive messages. So I have no idea what’s going on. I do see that there has been a lot of discussion about how to handle it. Rupert weighed in on getting a new forum for the discussion group. Others, like Adam and Martin, suggested just having multiple platforms from which people can choose. At the moment I am so frustrated with csgnet that I don’t really care what is done (I’m in reorganization mode, just flailing away) so I wouldn’t trust anything I say at the moment, at least regarding csgnet discussion groups. I don’t even know if I’ll see your replies to this email. But I’ll just say that my bias is toward having one central PCT discussion site. Maybe that’s to “central committee” for all my libertarian friends out there but I think it’s the only way to keep our agreements and disagreements in one place without having what are basically non-PCT tributaries, like self regulation, branch off and fall to the [dark side](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_side_(Star_Wars)) of [the Force](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_(Star_Wars)) (S-R theory) and serve the evil [Galactic Empire](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactic_Empire_(Star_Wars)) (conventional psychology).
>
> >
>
> > Best regards
>
> >
>
> > Han Solo er… Rick Marken
>
> >
>
> >
>
> –
> Richard S. Marken PhD
> [www.mindreadings.com](http://www.mindreadings.com)
> It is difficult to get a man to [understand](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Understand) something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair
>
> On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Richard Marken [rsmarken@gmail.com](mailto:rsmarken@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> > [From Rick Marken (2014.04.06.1115)]
>
> > I’ve gotten contentless messages from Martin, Bruce, Matti and Rupert. I presume these a result of testing the subscription link? Is that right? But why on this subject heading?
>
> >
>
> > Best
>
> >
>
> > Rick
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> –
> Richard S. Marken PhD
> [www.mindreadings.com](http://www.mindreadings.com)
> It is difficult to get a man to [understand](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Understand) something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair
>
> On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Martin Taylor [mmt-csg@mmtaylor.net](mailto:mmt-csg@mmtaylor.net) wrote:
>
> > This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> –
> Richard S. Marken PhD
> [www.mindreadings.com](http://www.mindreadings.com)
> It is difficult to get a man to [understand](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Understand) something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair
---
### Author:  [@Matti\_Kolu](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/Matti_Kolu)
#### Post date: [April 7, 2014, 4:44pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/18 "2014-04-07T16:44:42Z")
[From Matti Kolu (2014.04.07.1845 CET)]
Is there enough agreement among the forum proponents of what the
overall purpose of the forum should be? The interests and experience
levels of the participants on this mailing list are widely divergent.
Can these interests be accommodated under a single, shared banner? I
suspect that people who get their introduction to PCT from a text such
as "Introduction to Modern Psychology" would be very hesitant to join
a forum such as ECACS. It is too intimidating. (Largely by design?)
I shudder every time "mission statements" are brought up, but it seems
to me that the hard stuff lies in figuring out the objectives of the
potential forum, and in reaching some kind of shared understanding of
who the readers and members should be. Building a community without a
some kind of shared mission (or worldview) is hard. In comparison to
the social stuff, choosing an adequate software platform is trivial.
Matti
---
### Author:  [@MartinT](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/MartinT)
#### Post date: [April 7, 2014, 6:19pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/19 "2014-04-07T18:19:46Z")
[Martin Taylor 2014.04.07.12.53]
> [From Matti Kolu (2014.04.07.1845 CET)]
>
> Is there enough agreement among the forum proponents of what the
> overall purpose of the forum should be? The interests and experience
> levels of the participants on this mailing list are widely divergent.
> Can these interests be accommodated under a single, shared banner? I
> suspect that people who get their introduction to PCT from a text such
> as "Introduction to Modern Psychology" would be very hesitant to join
> a forum such as ECACS. It is too intimidating. (Largely by design?)
Not by design, but by the choice of the people who chose to belong. ECACS did have "Complex" in its name, but that was why its participants chose to start it up in the first place. If we decide on a Forum, it need not have that emphasis. If that forum were to be ECACS, perhaps another acronym could be found. Anyway, it would be a good idea to include a specific area of the Explorer's Club for tutorials and beginner's questions (continuing the "Explorers" metaphor, the "Equipment Store" or something like that. And I would have to make sure that the phpBB translation worked properly.
A Forum can be organized to suit all levels of expertise and directions of interest, and to allow ideas to be developed over years, rather than days or weeks (followed by the results being forgotten). A mailing list is a linear time-based sequence of mixed interests and abilities. Even when read by the thread, the time-based appearance of the messages makes it relatively hard to develop an understanding of the issues.
Or so I find.
> I shudder every time "mission statements" are brought up, but it seems
> to me that the hard stuff lies in figuring out the objectives of the
> potential forum, and in reaching some kind of shared understanding of
> who the readers and members should be. Building a community without a
> some kind of shared mission (or worldview) is hard. In comparison to
> the social stuff, choosing an adequate software platform is trivial.
>
> Matti
Yes. We need someone who knows something about scientific psychology to determine how to handle that problem 🙂
Martin
> **···**
>
> On 2014/04/7 12:44 PM, Matti Kolu wrote:
---
### Author:  [@Matti\_Kolu](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/Matti_Kolu)
#### Post date: [April 8, 2014, 2:34pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532/20 "2014-04-08T14:34:45Z")
[From Matti Kolu (2014.04.08.1635 CET)]
I have played around a bit with Discourse now. Once you get used to
it, the user experience is pretty good compared to most forums. The
current email functionality is decent, but not fantastic. It is
possible to create new topics by email. You can set up a specific
address for each category and sub-category, so that emails to
[papers@pctdomain.com](mailto:papers@pctdomain.com) are sorted under one category, emails to
[mol@pctdomain.com](mailto:mol@pctdomain.com) are sorted under another one, and so on. Each user
can select which categories they want to subscribe to, and which
they'd like to ignore. Categories can be made private, or only
available to members of certain user groups. You can choose to receive
a copy of each post or choose to receive digests. If you post through
email, you can use Markdown syntax for formatting. In the attached
screenshots, I have displayed the following:
1) What the preferences for subscribing to categories look like.
2) How it is possible to format emails using Markdown syntax. (Note
the "To" address)
3) How the parsed post appears in Discourse. The topic was
automatically placed in the "Papers" subcategory.
4) What the formatted post looks like in your email client.
I will leave the test instance online for a few more days. You can try
out the email functionality by sending a mail to any of the addresses
listed below:
> **···**
>
> -----------------
> PCT:
> [perceptualposts+pct@gmail.com](mailto:perceptualposts+pct@gmail.com)
>
> Meta:
> [perceptualposts+meta@gmail.com](mailto:perceptualposts+meta@gmail.com)
>
> Research:
> [perceptualposts+research@gmail.com](mailto:perceptualposts+research@gmail.com)
>
> Research/Papers:
> [perceptualposts+papers@gmail.com](mailto:perceptualposts+papers@gmail.com)
>
> ECACS:
> [perceptualposts+ecacs@gmail.com](mailto:perceptualposts+ecacs@gmail.com)
>
> ECACS/Maps&Charts:
> [perceptualposts+ecacs.maps@gmail.com](mailto:perceptualposts+ecacs.maps@gmail.com)
>
> Robotics:
> [perceptualposts+robotics@gmail.com](mailto:perceptualposts+robotics@gmail.com)
>
> Psychology/MOL:
> [perceptualposts+mol@gmail.com](mailto:perceptualposts+mol@gmail.com)
> ---------------------
> If you send the email without first having logged in once, the
> contents will be posted as a quote by the System user, so all
> formatting will be ignored. As this is a test installation, I used a
> Gmail address for the incoming mail. There's a delay of about 3-5
> minutes before the sent posts appear on [http://dis.loopgain.com](http://dis.loopgain.com) .
>
> I am not sure if all people will think that Discourse constitutes an
> improvement over more typical forums of the vBulletin/phpBB/MyBB type,
> and I have not compared it to Xenforo or Vanillaforums. There are some
> glitches, that's for sure, and some moderation functionality is still
> lacking. Things that at a first glance appear to be annoying are
> actually not: the categories initially look cluttered with all the
> "pinned" topics, but these "pins" can be cleared by the user, once
> they have been read.
>
> Matti
>
> Content-Type: image/png; name="1-discourse-watch-mute.png"
> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="1-discourse-watch-mute.png"
> X-Attachment-Id: f\_htr7d78r0
>
> Content-Type: image/png; name="2-markdown-testokolov.png"
> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="2-markdown-testokolov.png"
> X-Attachment-Id: f\_htr7dlqg1
>
> Content-Type: image/png; name="3-markdown-parsed-in-discourse.png"
> Content-Disposition: attachment;
> filename="3-markdown-parsed-in-discourse.png"
> X-Attachment-Id: f\_htr7dv8j2
>
> Content-Type: image/png; name="4-markdown-parsed-in-gmail.png"
> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="4-markdown-parsed-in-gmail.png"
> X-Attachment-Id: f\_htr9gysm3
[Next page](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/choosing-a-new-csgnet/2532.md?page=2)