[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: New? LIT site.
- To: Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "'Kevin 'Tex' Houston'" <email@example.com>
- Subject: RE: New? LIT site.
- From: David Levine <David@InterWorld.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 09:20:05 -0400
- Cc: "KellySt@aol.com" <KellySt@aol.com>, "T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl" <T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl>, "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>, "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>, "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>, "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>
- Cc: "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>, "DotarSojat@aol.com" <DotarSojat@aol.com>, "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>, "MLEN3097@Mercury.GC.PeachNet.EDU" <MLEN3097@Mercury.GC.PeachNet.EDU>, "101765.2200@CompuServe.COM" <101765.2200@CompuServe.COM>, "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>
- Cc: "Lessa@worldnet.att.net" <Lessa@worldnet.att.net>
>Ouch. If we're going to pay that much, then let's just get our own server
>InterNIC Domain name. forgot about urly-bird, let's just get a real site.
Well, of course, I agree here - I wouldn't suggest going to AOL unless we
>> I guess my thought would be that a major sponcer like AOL (whos rich
>> write us off as a novelty forever) could provide us with a stable high
>Or until they see enough activity at the site that they think we can pay
>I see real potential "blackmail" problems. ie. It would be such a hassel
>for a new site that we would be unwilling to move. I would prefer to stay
>Sunsite than go to AOL.
Okay, I suppose I hadn't thought of that... could they at some point ask us
if our traffic was high enough? What kind of history do they have right now
their free accounts?
The other thing is that Ric said:
>My only problem with AOL is thier flakey billing policies and over
>pricing..........Would we have to put up with thier continual "down
>graphics..................I guess in short I don't trust AOL.....but that
I think the thing here is that the site would not be "on" AOL (i.e. we
have to dial-in, get accounts, pay, etc) but rather AOL hosts the site on
web servers. So if we get the space for free, and its accessable from the
and they don't go back on the free thing, then its a good deal. If we don't
get free space or its not accessable from the web, then its not.
Back to Kevin:
>As for time constraints, having multiple access codes to the site, would
>us all to take over Sysadmin duties if needed.