> >Maybe it's just me, but in all the years I've been on the Internet (and
> >ARPANET before that), I've never encountered having to collect funds to
> >help support a mailing list.  The whole fund drive just seems sort of
> >alien to me in this venue.
>
>         Times change.
>
>         The venue is no longer academics using University infra-
>         structure.

Yeah, and the two lists I run now are on my own machine, so what's
the point?  It's not as if a University if required to host a
mailing list.  This stuff is far from rocket science these days.

> >I run a few mailing lists for some topics that I'm involved in, and the
> >expense is not the problem - it's finding the time to do a good job.  I
> >know that in my case, at least, money wouldn't fix that problem.
>
>         The problem is the inadequacy of the hardware platform
>         currently being used to host the list (ref AndyW and Jory).

If I'm not mistaken, the mailing list is hosted on an IBM mainframe.  It's
just not clear to me what role Jory's machine plays in a simply automated
mailing list facility, and why it's on the critical path.

I understand that the administrators of the host may be unwilling to
continue to host the list, but I was surprised that the perceived solution
was to take up a collection rather than simply ask if anyone else was
willing to host the mailing list.

>         A solution is desired that doesn't involve reciprocal
>         favours (ie no politics).
>
>         Self-sufficiency is proposed.

I would think that someone in the community might be willing to host
the list - that's self-sufficiency.

Again, it strikes me as unusal that the solution is to take up a collection;
that's never happened in any of the discussion groups/mailing lists I've
been involved with in the past.  Usually if the list loses it's "home", a
simple query to the community/membership of the list usually brought
multiple offers out of the woodwork.

Perhaps things have changed.  I'll just go away now.

Louis Mamakos