next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects
Hello, Problems with my home computer have resulted in the loss of several files related to the IP survey. Rather than start everything all over again I've decided to make the "report" based on what I've been able to recover... 14 IP editors responded from a mail out of 45 emails 12 IP editors maintain only one site (some very large) 1 IP editor maintains 2 sites 1 IP editor maintains 4 sites 12 IP editors are CCN members all 14 IP editors maintain their site(s) as a volunteer 9 IP editors primarily access CCN through dial-up; telnet is the next most common (7) 2 of the organizations have considered moving to a commercial ISP(reasons given: domain name; organization is spread across 4 provinces, other ISP's can make access easier for other members to access and edit pages) 10 IP editors use CCN as their personal ISP; 4 use another ISP as well 13 IP editors said that they were happy with the level of service from CCN some comments: provided by the IP editors: appreciate the speed of lynx; initial training was fine but there are still mysteries about CCN's structure and file management that elude me; like CCN as a community net but not for accessing the www; [I] mainyain CCN membership as support for the freenet concept and the service it provides the community and community groups. suggested improvements: also provided by the IP editors graphical interface - but should be paid for by those that use it; like to see majordomo replaced with more modern listserver; ongoing IP training so that we can continue to improve sites. My editorial comment... based on this survey and general observations ... In general: IP editors have a loyalty to their own organization, but not necessarily to CCN. The most common reasons for a group to use CCN as their ISP are: (1) low (or no) cost, and (2) the volunteer IP editor is already a CCN user. It is unlikely that that we will be able to recruit CCN volunteers from the IP editors . My attempts to involve IP editors in the IP committee have been totally unsuccessful. ---- Peter Mortimer Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects