Discussion:
GEN-MEDIEVAL
Add Reply
s***@mindspring.com
2018-03-29 20:10:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
A few days ago, I created a Rootsweb account, according to the instructions I received in an e-mail claiming that Rootsweb is back. I sent one message to gen-***@rootsweb.com as a test, and never received the message, even though my list of subscribed groups still includes Gen-medieval. A check of the list "archives" currently shows a total of two messages, mine and one other. This does not necessarily contradict the claim that bringing back the old archives is in the works, but I would have still expected more than two. Has anybody else signed up at Rootsweb and sent a message to Gen-medieval in the last couple of weeks, or is everyone else just using soc.genealogy.medieval? In any case, the gateway between the two is still broken.

Today, I finally gave up and created a Google account (something I was hoping to avoid) so that I can participate in Google Groups. Is there any chance that the gateway will be fixed in the forseeable future?

Stewart Baldwin
taf
2018-03-29 20:46:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by s***@mindspring.com
Today, I finally gave up and created a Google account (something I was hoping to avoid) so that I can participate in Google Groups. Is there any chance that the gateway will be fixed in the forseeable future?
The gateway is definitely broken, and I don't know if it has just fallen through the cracks, if they have not gotten around to it, or if they have no intention of restoring any gateways, what with their increased focus on 'security' that was the reason given for the downtime.

As to GEN-MEDIEVAL, I have not received any messages since it theoretically went back on line, and wasn't sure if it was still dead or if nobody had sent anything (meaning nobody received anything to know it was back up). I am not sure what to make of the fact that two messages made it to the archive without them ever coming to me as a subscriber.

taf
Jan Wolfe
2018-03-31 16:07:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Per the instructions on rootsweb, I just now signed up to claim my email address, provided a new password, and then signed in. I see archived gen-medieval posts from 2015-2017 and from January 2018, and I see two posts in March 2018, Stewart's and one from Darrel Hockley, at https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/gen-***@rootsweb.com/
s***@mindspring.com
2018-03-31 17:14:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
When I checked the archives a couple of days ago, I didn't notice that these earlier archives were available on links at the left of the page. I'm not crazy about the current format of these archives. (No threading, too many unsorted messages with too few subject lines displayed per screen.)

Stewart Baldwin
John Higgins
2018-04-01 04:19:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by s***@mindspring.com
When I checked the archives a couple of days ago, I didn't notice that these earlier archives were available on links at the left of the page. I'm not crazy about the current format of these archives. (No threading, too many unsorted messages with too few subject lines displayed per screen.)
Stewart Baldwin
I agree with you regarding the unsatisfactory look of the new format of the GenMed archives. Perhaps it'll look better when (if ever) it gets populated with the historical archives of GenMed (and SGM via the now non-functional gateway). But I'm not counting on that happening anytime soon. As to the format, I'd guess that we'll be stuck with what they've given us....
r***@yahoo.com
2018-04-02 15:21:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
It looks like they've now added the backfile from 2014, which is good. But it's somewhat concerning that far from all of the 2018 contributions have been added (0 for February, 2 for March, 0 for April [so far]).
taf
2018-04-02 17:06:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by r***@yahoo.com
It looks like they've now added the backfile from 2014, which is good.
But it's somewhat concerning that far from all of the 2018 contributions
have been added (0 for February, 2 for March, 0 for April [so far]).
But they have added all of the contributions to GEN-MEDIEVAL. The problem is that the discussions missed took place on soc.genealogy.medieval, not on GEN-MEDIEVAL. In the past, the two were joined by a gateway, such that any posts to one were automatically copied to the other. With the gateway down since December, none of the soc.gen.med posts ever went to GEN-MED, and they are not now nor will they ever be included in the GEN-MED archive.

Due to similar circumstances in the past, along with occasional gateway flakiness and the loss of almost all of the earliest years of posts to soc.gen.med when archiver deja.com folded and Google cobbled together its archive from other sources, if you want to do a comprehensive search of the surviving posts, you have to independently search both soc.gen.med and GEN-MED archives.

taf
r***@yahoo.com
2018-04-02 17:37:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by taf
Post by r***@yahoo.com
It looks like they've now added the backfile from 2014, which is good.
But it's somewhat concerning that far from all of the 2018 contributions
have been added (0 for February, 2 for March, 0 for April [so far]).
But they have added all of the contributions to GEN-MEDIEVAL. The problem is that the discussions missed took place on soc.genealogy.medieval, not on GEN-MEDIEVAL. In the past, the two were joined by a gateway, such that any posts to one were automatically copied to the other. With the gateway down since December, none of the soc.gen.med posts ever went to GEN-MED, and they are not now nor will they ever be included in the GEN-MED archive.
Due to similar circumstances in the past, along with occasional gateway flakiness and the loss of almost all of the earliest years of posts to soc.gen.med when archiver deja.com folded and Google cobbled together its archive from other sources, if you want to do a comprehensive search of the surviving posts, you have to independently search both soc.gen.med and GEN-MED archives.
taf
Oh, right, I always forget about the two sides and former gateway.

Are we thinking that the gateway will never be fixed, sort of like a disproved Gateway Ancestor?
taf
2018-04-02 19:27:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by r***@yahoo.com
Are we thinking that the gateway will never be fixed, sort of like a
disproved Gateway Ancestor?
No idea, but given that the gateways represent a bypass of all the newly-instituted improved security that was supposedly the whole reason for the months-long fiasco, . . . .

taf
Peter Stewart
2018-04-02 21:49:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by r***@yahoo.com
Post by taf
Post by r***@yahoo.com
It looks like they've now added the backfile from 2014, which is good.
But it's somewhat concerning that far from all of the 2018 contributions
have been added (0 for February, 2 for March, 0 for April [so far]).
But they have added all of the contributions to GEN-MEDIEVAL. The problem is that the discussions missed took place on soc.genealogy.medieval, not on GEN-MEDIEVAL. In the past, the two were joined by a gateway, such that any posts to one were automatically copied to the other. With the gateway down since December, none of the soc.gen.med posts ever went to GEN-MED, and they are not now nor will they ever be included in the GEN-MED archive.
Due to similar circumstances in the past, along with occasional gateway flakiness and the loss of almost all of the earliest years of posts to soc.gen.med when archiver deja.com folded and Google cobbled together its archive from other sources, if you want to do a comprehensive search of the surviving posts, you have to independently search both soc.gen.med and GEN-MED archives.
taf
Oh, right, I always forget about the two sides and former gateway.
Are we thinking that the gateway will never be fixed, sort of like a disproved Gateway Ancestor?
More hopeless than a disproved gateway ancestor, who could always turn out to have a different link to the medieval era whereas Gen-Med has one link to sgm or it has none - unless a worm-hole opens up in the twilight zone ...

Peter Stewart
mandiri pinjaman dana
2021-07-17 00:31:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Pinjaman dana jaminan bpkb mobil
https://teletype.in/@mandiripinjamandana/vNA4xAxtdKE

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...