4 ms·
I would argue that email is not suitable for asynchronous long-form threadful discussions. The limitation that email has is that if you're not part of that con
by u801e 6y ago
I would argue that email is not suitable for asynchronous long-form threadful discussions. The limitation that email has is that if you're not part of that conversation from the beginning, you'll have to piece it together from previous quoted material.
One email like protocol that properly handles this is NNTP.
- networkimprov 6y agoI agree with both of you, and TMTP supports adding people to a thread after it starts (see PostNotify).
- u801e 6y agoI'm not finding much about TMTP or postnotify with a search through Google. Could you link to some resources?
- networkimprov 6y agoI've only just begun publicizing it, after getting the client & server implementations to a point where folks can evaluate them. Protocol: https://github.com/networkimprov/mnm/blob/master/Protocol.md https://github.com/networkimprov/mnm/blob/master/Protocol.md Why TMTP? https://mnmnotmail.org/rationale.html https://mnmnotmail.org/rationale.html Follow: https://twitter.com/mnmnotmail https://twitter.com/mnmnotmail
- layer8 6y agoTrue regarding the late-comer aspect, although it is less of an issue when using mailing lists with an archive. In the past, when lacking an archive I also just asked another participant to send me the earlier discussion in mbox format, which was easily accomplished with the unix MUAs of the time. Regarding the actual modes of discussion I was thinking of though, usenet and email are mostly the same.
- u801e 6y ago> I was thinking of though, usenet and email are mostly the same. For the most part, they are and many readers support both protocols (or at least they did in the past). The nice thing about NNTP is that it doesn't require maintaining a separate archive or having someone send you an mbox file to import. Just subscribing to the appropriate groups was sufficient (depending on the article retention policy).