RE: New? LIT site.

[David Levine <David@InterWorld.com>]

Regarding AOL...

>Ouch.  If we're going to pay that much, then let's just get our own server
>space and 
>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
got the
"free version."

>> I guess my thought would be that a major sponcer like AOL (whos rich
>enough
>> 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
>for it.
>I see real potential "blackmail" problems.  ie. It would be such a hassel
>to look 
>for a new site that we would be unwilling to move.  I would prefer to stay
>at 
>Sunsite than go to AOL.

Okay, I suppose I hadn't thought of that... could they at some point ask us
to pay
if our traffic was high enough?  What kind of history do they have right now
with
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
loading"
>graphics..................I guess in short I don't trust AOL.....but that
is
>my problem..........

I think the thing here is that the site would not be "on" AOL (i.e. we
wouldn't
have to dial-in, get accounts, pay, etc) but rather AOL hosts the site on
their
web servers.  So if we get the space for free, and its accessable from the
web,
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
>allow
>us all to take over Sysadmin duties if needed.

Also true.

-David