[p2p-research] "Many of us will not send mail to gmail.com"

[marc fawzi]

I'm sure there are many more opinions about this subject ... within
this list and in general... but majority of people are happy when
technology just works, not too concerned about underlying philosophy
especially when they're carrying out the fight on a different level.

I think it's just a matter of personal inclination... I can't separate
the technology from the mission because I've spent most of my life
thinking about technology and how to use it to change the way people
think ...

On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
> a rectification, Marc, I was speaking for myself, not for the list ....
>
> the p2p-f wiki lists all kind of p2p infrastructural technologies ...
>
> it's something I (we?) support in general, but not as an obligation for all
> members to abide by ...
>
> Michel
>
>
> On 5/10/09, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> <<
>> it's "why a definitely non-p2p way to do email
>> > is much more popular on a pro-p2p list?"
>> >>
>>
>> Marco:
>>
>> What is the purpose of the list?
>>
>> If the list's purpose was to promote the use of p2p technologies as
>> well as p2p paradigms (beyond technologies) then you would expect the
>> list members to care a lot. But as Michel put it in his preceding
>> reply (in this thread) the purpose of the list is focused on
>> discussing and promoting p2p paradigms but not technologies (or as
>> Michel put it: driving the car and not worrying about the motor [and I
>> add: not worrying whether it's a p2p motor or a centralized motor or a
>> hybrid])
>>
>> I think this is a taste issue. People can make all sorts of arguments
>> (like I do, like we all do) to justify their choices but at the end of
>> the day it's a taste issue not an objective thing.
>>
>> I'm fine if this list's taste is to drive the car and not worry about
>> the motor. That's because at least the car is being driven in the
>> right direction and the argument is: whatever motor does the best job
>> NOW, TODAY, because we need to get to our destination.
>>
>> To people like me and you, it seems that we care about the motor as
>> much as the car and the destination.  Maybe others care deeply about
>> the motor, but I hear Michel saying it's all physics to him and his
>> goal is to get to the destination.
>>
>> So I have no problem with it. However, being an engineer I can't
>> ignore physics and mechanics since to me the "design" of the
>> technology we use is an integral part of the belief system and the
>> vision, inseparable.
>>
>> Marc
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 12:15 AM, M. Fioretti <mfioretti at nexaima.net>
>> wrote:
>> > On Sat, May 09, 2009 23:45:33 PM +0200, Kris ROOSE wrote:
>> >> Ryan and Marc,
>> >>
>> >> I don/t understand you:
>> >
>> > Any good email client automatically includes an attribution line (the
>> > one above starting with "On Sat, May 09...") which leaves a very clear
>> > and very fast to read track (EVEN when it's a quote of a quote of a
>> > quote!!!) of who said what. That feature, and of course proper
>> > trimming/quoting, exist to avoid misattributions and
>> > misunderstandings. The person who "criticized" Gmail sorting it's only
>> > me (Marco), not Marc Fawzi nor Ryan.
>> >
>> >> all my thousands of Gmails are immediately sorted by date... and by
>> >> much more than that
>> >
>> > I am not a Gmail user. I got an account years ago, but only played
>> > with it a bit. More recently, I played again a little bit, with
>> > permission, into some friends Gmail accounts. In both cases, I didn't
>> > find or recognize any of the ways to sort messages (recipient, sender,
>> > date, size, etc...) which are pre-built in almost all other clients I
>> > know of, so I got the impression that Gmail is really limited and
>> > quite below average from this specific point of view. A quick search
>> > shows I'm not alone in this:
>> >
>> >
>> > http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/gmail/thread?tid=7e8728af01fea293&hl=en
>> >
>> > http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/07/18/the-one-thing-gmail-really-needs-and-has-never-been-done/
>> > http://www.thisisgoingtobebig.com/2005/06/gmail_sorting_i.html
>> >
>> > Since the 1st link is... three days old, I gather that the sorting
>> > limits denounced in the two other links are still there. For **me**
>> > they would be enough not to use Gmail, but no problem with others who
>> > don't care, really. Please note that my main question/curiosity isn't
>> > "does Gmail suck or not", it's "why a definitely non-p2p way to do email
>> > is much more popular on a pro-p2p list?"
>> >
>> > Marco
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Your own civil rights and the quality of your life heavily depend on how
>> > software is used *around* you:            http://digifreedom.net/node/84
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > p2presearch mailing list
>> > p2presearch at listcultures.org
>> > http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Marc Fawzi
>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> p2presearch mailing list
>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>
>
> --
> Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>
> Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
> http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
> http://p2pfoundation.ning.com
>
> Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>
> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
> http://www.shiftn.com/



-- 

Marc Fawzi
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi