Free-Conversant Support / Account Aggregation (was: eGroups vs. Conversant)
 Home   About Conversant   Free Sites   Hosting   Support   XML-RPC 

Search




Subject Account Aggregation (was: eGroups vs. Conversant)
Posted 10/10/2000; 1:26 PM by Seth Dillingham
Last Modified 10/10/2000; 1:27 PM by Seth Dillingham
In Response To Re: Conversant vs eGroups - no contest (#1499)
Label None. Read 1271
<Previous Next> Thread: Forward chronological view Reverse chronological view Hierarchical outline view Edit Reply

Walter Ludwick said

>In essence, Brian, i mean simplifying the user experience of joining
>and participating in multiple discussion groups, in different ways.  
>I think one of the key factors here is account aggregation (maybe
>that's a better word than syndication) - i.e. eGroups maintains one
>master account for you, and you don't have to go creating new ID/
>P'word combinations for every new (screened) discussion group
>that you join.

This is a decent description of zones!

When we were originally working on Conversant, we didn't know that Free-Conversant was going to exist. It was only in the first few months of 2000 that I finally decided that we needed a free demonstration service.

Conversant was originally, and really still is, targetted at the business audience. A zone could represent a division, or some other logical subgroup of a company. Your membership is stored at the zone level, and within that zone you can be a member of any number of "conversations" (sites). You only need one logon ID and password for anything in the zone, and we even have the central message area that you discussed, built into every zone!.

Hmm. I need to show you an example, so you can see I'm not just blowing smoke. I need to find a zone on one of our servers that has more than one publicly-accessible conversation. Brian (Carnell), do you have one? Jim Roepcke? Duncan? Greg? Mark Morgan? Don Larson? You guys are the most likely to have multiple conversations in one of your zones, please let me know if you do have one so that I can complete my point.

See, you've exposed a slight problem: Free-Conversant (this free service) has a different target audience than does the product that it was originally intended to demonstrate. Put another way, what started out as a demonstration of our software has turned into a site hosting service with everything from free sites to dedicated servers.

OK, I know this is a little confusing for you (dear reader ;-) ), but I'll have to pick this up again after someone has given me the URLs for two publicly-accessible conversations in the same zone. If I don't get one within an hour or two, I'll add something to my own zone, TruerWords.

Seth

<Previous Next> Thread: Forward chronological view Reverse chronological view Hierarchical outline view Edit Reply
ENCLOSURES

None.
REPLIES

RE: Account Aggregation (was: eGroups vs. Conversant)
10/10/2000 by Mark Morgan
I have the test conversation, http://www.VoicesOfUnreason.com/pretend which

Account Aggregation, continued
10/10/2000 by Seth Dillingham
Walter Ludwick said : >>In essence, Brian, i mean simplifying the user experience


TRACKBACKS