[p2p-research] Post-Depression first: Americans get more money from government than they give back | csmonitor.com
teddks at gmail.com
Sun Nov 29 04:10:18 CET 2009
On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 21:44 -0500, Samuel Rose wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Ted Smith <teddks at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 12:26 -0500, Ryan Lanham wrote:
> >> Kevin, Ryan: is there a way to automatically cut-off replies
> >> at a certain length, that would save from the tedious manual
> >> deletion process that Marco seems to advocate?
> >> I don't think so. We can force emails of a certain size to be
> >> approved...but that's tedious.
> > Presumably, this would cause approval to happen only once every few days
> > or something like that, which would then strongly encourage people not
> > to post such long messages, which is the point, isn't it?
> Incidentally: This whole problem is in part the premise of Google
> Wave, in that it makes it easier to co-build threaded discussion over
> time (which is itself co-editable into actual documents).
> I am working now on a bot that can uniformly archive/sync and store
> independently of Wave.
> Might eventually be worth thinking about a future migration to either
> Wave, or open source software such as wagn, or other tools that can do
> both threaded and co-editable discussion (once developments allow for
> alerting people in some useful way across networks about relevant
> content, perhaps).
I've heard a lot about Google Wave, but I haven't yet seen a client
that's free software. It seems like it wouldn't make much sense to
discuss p2p on a proprietary platform; does anyone know if there is a
free software client for Wave so that we could try this out?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the p2presearch