I am experimenting with a new delivery method for this newsletter. I would like to invite you to help test it and offer your comments and suggestions.
Background
Delivering an e-newsletter via e-mail is becoming a very frustrating experience these days. Two years ago I could send lengthy e-mails containing the newsletters, and 99.9% of them would be delivered to the addressees. Sadly, that is no longer true in the year 2004. The reason is simple: spam.
Two years ago, spam mail was simply an annoyance. Since then, spam mail has mushroomed into a huge problem for people who maintain e-mail servers. I have seen estimates now that 80% or more of all e-mail sent is spam, or “unsolicited commercial e-mail” (UCE). Thousands of mail servers around the world have crashed because of the unplanned load that spam mail placed upon them.
Out of self-defense, almost all mail server administrators have installed some sort of filtering software in an attempt to identify and delete unwanted junk mail. Unfortunately, many of these mail filters also delete wanted e-mails, such as this newsletter. Several genealogy e-newsletters plus Harvard University, the New York Times, several stock market newsletters, the Disney Corporation, Yahoo, Macromedia, Amazon, and many others have reported similar difficulties with their e-publications.
In one controlled experiment, e-mail expert Fred Langa sent 10,000 e-newsletters to subscribers who had volunteered to participate in the test. Langa wrote a lengthy newsletter and used several “sensitive words” and phrases. The result? 40% of the newsletter messages were never delivered. You can read more about this experiment at http://www.eogn.com/archives/news0403.htm#UnreliableMailing.
Possible Solutions
So how can this problem be corrected? Luckily, there are two possible solutions.
First of all, it is easy to move the newsletter to the Web. In fact, I have done that. The Standard Edition of this newsletter has always been available online at http://www.eogn.com, and a few months ago I started placing the Plus Edition online as well. Publishing on a Web page avoids the spam filter problems, but it is less convenient for many readers. Instead of having each newsletter arrive automatically in e-mail, the subscriber has to remember to go online and read the newsletter on the Web site. I find that it is easy to forget such things.
The second solution is one that I like better: publish the newsletter as a blog, using XML data format. In this manner, it can be read by anyone using either a regular Web browser or one of the newsreader programs described in the previous article. Anyone who is willing to take a few minutes to install a blog newsreader will find that reading this and other blogs is as easy and convenient as reading e-mail: the newsletter articles will arrive automatically as long as the blog reader is running. In other words, it works in a similar fashion to e-mail. Even better, a blog is not subject to spam filters since it does not use any mail servers.
The Beta Test
As an experiment, I am now publishing the Standard Edition of this newsletter as a Web Log, or blog. It can be read with any Web browser, such as Internet Explorer, Netscape, Opera, or Safari. It can also be read with any XML/Atom-compatible newsreader, which gives the reader the advantages of speed and convenience described earlier.
I will try side-by-side publishing of both the e-mail version and the new blog version of this newsletter for a few weeks. I may switch to another brand of blog software, depending upon how the first tests progress. If the experiment is successful, I will probably replace the current online HTML version of the Standard Edition newsletter with the blog version. Remember that you will always be able to read it with any standard Web browser; you do not need any “special program” at all. If you wish, you may use a special newsreader program to add convenience.
Assuming that everything goes as planned, I will also convert the Plus Edition of the newsletter to a blog format in the near future.
If you would like to help test the new experiment and offer comments or suggestions, use any standard Web browser and go to http://blog.eogn.com (that address will probably change sometime in the future). Macintosh users are especially invited to join the beta test effort. If you also have an Atom/XML-capable reader, please feel free to use that also. Point it to http://eogn.typepad.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/atom.xml. However, use of specialized blog-reading software is not required. Your normal Web browser will suffice.
Please note that the new blog-format articles have a comments feature: after reading an article, you can immediately add your comments, criticisms, suggestions, or corrections online in a place for everyone to see. The comments section may replace this newsletter's Discussion Board. Please use the online comments for all beta test feedback.
As with all beta tests, things may change at any time. The results may or may not be moved into production. After all, that is the purpose of a beta test.
Thank you for your assistance.
I use Comcast High Speed Cable Internet Access with MSN9 Premium and have not had any problems in receiving the Plus Edition (or any other prior). I have logged in to the Blog edition today and it came up immediately. Having had no problems, I am happy with whatever you end up providing.
Posted by: Robert L. Gibbs | June 13, 2004 at 11:27 PM
Thanks for the comments Robert. I am estimating that about 30% of the newsletters get deleted before they arrive at the addressees' mailboxes.
I have several subscriptions. The one sent to my e-mail address of richard@eastman.net always arrives. The one sent to my e-mail address on Yahoo.com always arrives. The one sent to my e-mail address on MyWay.com NEVER arrives. The one sent to my e-mail address on HotMail.com sometimes arrives, sometimes does not.
What used to be a simple process has become complex. That is why I am so hopeful that the blog solution will be more reliable.
Thanks for your comments.
- Dick Eastman
Posted by: Dick Eastman | June 13, 2004 at 11:33 PM
I have never had a problem getting my plus or standard editions at my address, (I think they go to the Telus address)
I had no problem reading the blog. I am using Safari and Panther OS.
I do know I will need to be reminded to do it.
I would say do whatever is easiest for you so you have more time to write.
I'll be happy to beta test anything.
mary
Posted by: Mary Arthur | June 13, 2004 at 11:36 PM
Dick,
The site works fine on my Mac running Mac OS 9.2.2, Internet Explorer 5.1.7. It also looks and works fine in Mozilla 1.2.1, the last version of Mozilla available for OS 9.
I also ran over to my wife's iBook G4, which is running Mac OS X 10.3.3. The site looks fine in Safari 1.2.1. I fired up NetNewsWire Lite 1.0.9b1 to check your Atom feed. NNW is the most widely used feed reader on OS X, and version 1.0.9b1 is the first to support Atom. The Atom feed works fine there.
I'm not crazy about the use of frames on the site, as it makes it difficult to bookmark pages and to print them, but it's easy enough for me to work around by going to the actual URL of the main frame.
Posted by: Ralph Brandi | June 13, 2004 at 11:51 PM
I must say that I love the idea of comments posted immediately at the end of each article.
Thanks for going to this format. I hope that the beta test becomes permanent.
Posted by: Jennifer | June 13, 2004 at 11:59 PM
The ISP I use does mark the + edition as spam but still keeps it available in full. My system is a PowerBook running OS 9.3, IE 5.03 and a modem running at best 28.8. Quick downloads even with graphics. Looked at two articles in full before writing this. Everything seems to work correctly. The format is great. Enough to understand if the article is of interest. The blog method is a winner for me. Tomorrow Ill bite the bullet and power up my computer running Windows XP (which I truely dislike) to see if it works as well for me on that computer.
Regards,
PJH
Posted by: Patrick J Harris | June 14, 2004 at 12:01 AM
Dick,
I like it for two reasons. First it will not get accidently deleted from my mail box and it is much better looking and actually easier to read since it breaks up better. I would still like an email saying that it is now available, with a link in the email so that it is just as easy to get to, for us lazy people, as it was when just opening the email.
Mike Keelean
Posted by: Mike Keelean | June 14, 2004 at 12:10 AM
I love it! For me, it is easier to read, more interesting visually, and I would bet that you will get more people making comments as it is certainly easier when it is right here. I would agree with others that we will need to be reminded.
Thanks for all of your good work, I learn so much from your newsletter.
Posted by: cathi | June 14, 2004 at 01:42 AM
Dick: Your PLUS edition always reaches me just fine. It is easy to read and I enjoy. This "blog" edition is very difficult to read -- the print is so small for older eyes. I have no objection to the change, but would appreciate being able to read the text without straining. YES, I did just have an eye exam and I can see just fine according to the doc. Thanks for listening.
Posted by: Norma Jean Drebin | June 14, 2004 at 04:05 AM
Hi Dick,
I like the idea of the blog format, but agree with Mike Keelean that it would be nice to have a regular email telling us when the latest edition is out. The effectiveness of this system may perhaps be demonstrated by the fact that I've been getting your Plus edition newsletter for about 8 months, but this is the first comment I've made! Best of luck.
Norma - You should be able to increase the size of the blog text by simply choosing View/Text Size/Larger in your browser options. That's for IE - it is probably slightly different for Netscape users.
Posted by: Brett Payne | June 14, 2004 at 04:56 AM
The purpose of a beta test is to see if things work as planned. No guarantees, but I suspect there will always be a weekly notice sent by e-mail giving the new titles of articles posted in the past seven days.
Posted by: Dick Eastman | June 14, 2004 at 06:53 AM
Knowing your fondness for AOL, and the perceived aggravation experienced historically, what problems can I look forward to?
Posted by: Barry | June 14, 2004 at 09:15 AM
---> Knowing your fondness for AOL, and the perceived aggravation experienced historically, what problems can I look forward to?
Well, that is the purpose of the beta test: to find out. However, I am not yet aware of any problems reading blogs on AOL. The blog can be viewed in either of two methods: in a Web browser at http://blog.eogn.com and in a special blog newsreader program. Neither method uses e-mail in any way so there shouldn't be any problem with AOL's notorious mail servers. I am hopeful that this will solve "the AOL problem."
- Dick Eastman
Posted by: Dick Eastman | June 14, 2004 at 10:03 AM
Dick, I have the newest Opera but after about 15 minutes have not figured out how to use it as a specialized blog reader. How about a few clues? I'm now using Netscape to view it in html.
Dick
Posted by: Dick Cleaveland | June 14, 2004 at 10:16 AM
Dick (Cleaveland),
I just checked the 7.5 version of Opera for Mac and here's what I found.
1. In Opera, go to the Mail menu and choose Newsfeeds...
2. A window titled "Subscribe to RSS newsfeeds" is displayed.
3. Click the "New" button
4. Enter in:
A) a Name for the feed you are adding (like Eastman's newsletter")
B) The newsfeed's address (which is http://eogn.typepad.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/index.rdf)
C) the frequency Opera should check for updates to the feed
5. Click OK to close this window.
6. make sure the feed you just added has a check mark in front of it.
7. Choose OK to close the "Subscribe to RSS newsfeeds" window.
8. To read the newsfeed, click the Mail icon from the left side of the main Opera screen to open the Mail panel.
9. You should see a "Newsfeeds" item in the list.
10. Click the Newsfeeds item to open it and then click he name of the feed you want to read.
11. The list of items in the newsfeed should then appear in the main mail window. Click on an item to read it.
I hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Paul Burchfield
Posted by: Paul Burchfield | June 14, 2004 at 11:55 AM
i agree with Cathi about the size of the print. Also, I find that the matter of navigation to get to each article is a nuisance, in additioh to which my browser is taking quite a bit of time to do the navigation (although that may be a transient condition). Since I have had no trouble receiving the Plus edition, I would prefer to continue to receive it by e-mail.
Posted by: GeorgeT | June 14, 2004 at 12:05 PM
What ever works you is fine with me. I do need a reminder to go to the Blog if I do not receive the newsletter as I know I would forget.
Posted by: Peggy Wehe | June 14, 2004 at 12:15 PM
Sorry, I don't like it. An e-mail reminder that it is ready would remind me when to visit the site (I don't stay connected to the internet when not actively using it), but I don't especially like the newsletter blog when I get there.
Although very professional and attractive in appearance, it reminds me of voice mail: First, select from the following, click your selection, endure the advertising while waiting - it takes "forever" to load each item to read it in full, even on my broadband connection with a 2G processor, click again to return.
Posted by: David A. Grosland | June 14, 2004 at 02:27 PM
Paul Burchfield! Golly, it's been a long time! Nice to hear from you, and thanks for the info; will try it.
Posted by: Dick Cleaveland | June 14, 2004 at 03:17 PM
OK, with Paul's kind instructions I am now able to neatly read the newsletter using Opera - But I don't see how to get at the comments on an article witlout going to the html version.
Suggestions?
Posted by: Dick Cleaveland | June 14, 2004 at 03:44 PM
I favor the blog approach - even though I haven't seen any spcial treatment for reading the comments using Opera - Using Netscape or IE to read the html version would seem at this point to be easiest. Of course I reserve the right to change my mind on tht point.
But mostly I favor the blog because:
1.it solves Mssr. Eastman's problem of email distribution of his news items and
2. articles may be posted by him at any time, not necessarily in a weekly "batch" (the newly posted item on the Time article is an example), and
3. it fits with my scheme of using a newsgroup reader; I can go to it whenever I want or have it run in the background.
I should note that I have not had any problem receiving Dick's email versions.
Dick
Posted by: Dick Cleaveland | June 14, 2004 at 04:36 PM
I favor the blog approach - even though I haven't seen any spcial treatment for reading the comments using Opera - Using Netscape or IE to read the html version would seem at this point to be easiest. Of course I reserve the right to change my mind on tht point.
But mostly I favor the blog because:
1.it solves Mssr. Eastman's problem of email distribution of his news items and
2. articles may be posted by him at any time, not necessarily in a weekly "batch" (the newly posted item on the Time article is an example), and
3. it fits with my scheme of using a newsgroup reader; I can go to it whenever I want or have it run in the background.
I should note that I have not had any problem receiving Dick's email versions.
Dick
Posted by: Dick Cleaveland | June 14, 2004 at 04:36 PM
Dick,
I am a Plus subscriber and I like the blog format of your newsletter MUCH better. The color graphics and sidebar make it a more engaging experience. You have my vote for the blog!
Posted by: James Morgan | June 14, 2004 at 05:26 PM
I have a slow but very inexpensive dial-up connection with an ISP that allows me only 36 hours per month. It would take too much of this limited time to access this Blog each week, find the articles I want to read in depth, and save them to read off-line. Not to mention trying to remember to do that! So I would be forced to install a Newsreader program. What is the size of the free program you cited: "SharpReader"?
So far I have had no problem with receiving the email version (my ISP is Primus, location Toronto) and would rather stay with that unless/until that changes.
Posted by: Frank Rooks | June 14, 2004 at 05:31 PM
Dick, re: RSS and comments,
Many blogs don't put out a "feed" for the comments. It's a matter of whether the blog software has such a feature and whether the blog creator chooses to use that feature (if it exists).
->Paul B.
Posted by: Paul Burchfield | June 14, 2004 at 06:38 PM
I, too, prefer the E-mail version of the newsletter. Although the blog is nice, it's difficult for me to read, even when text size is set to the largest setting.
Barbara
Posted by: Barbara O'Nan | June 14, 2004 at 07:37 PM
---> It would take too much of this limited time to access this Blog each week, find the articles I want to read in depth, and save them to read off-line. Not to mention trying to remember to do that!
If you use a RSS (blog) newsreader, that whole process takes a few seconds to perhaps a minute on dial-up. It automatically connects, grabs all the latest articles, stores them on the hard drive and then (optionally) disconnects. You can then read the articles offline at your leisure.
I hope to continue to send the newsletters via e-mail but am aware that 30% or more of the e-mails never reach their destinations for reasons beyond my control. Sadly, it is impossible to guarantee delivery via e-mail. However, I can guarantee delivery both via Web browsers and via RSS (blog) newsreaders. That is the driving force to going to this format: anyone who has paid for a Plus Edition subscription should have a guaranteed delivery method!
- Dick Eastman
Posted by: Dick Eastman | June 14, 2004 at 07:50 PM
---> 2. articles may be posted by him at any time, not necessarily in a weekly "batch" (the newly posted item on the Time article is an example)
That brings up a big discussion here locally: it is now easy (technically) to go to a daily or multiple-times-per-week newsletter. The blog software makes the process of posting articles almost trivial. It does not, however, solve the workload problem of researching and writing them.
---> 3. it fits with my scheme of using a newsgroup reader; I can go to it whenever I want or have it run in the background.
Offline RSS (blog) newsreaders are still quite rare today but I believe that will change soon. I suspect that such newsreaders will become more and more common over the next couple of years as people learn more about their advantages.
- Dick Eastman
Posted by: Dick Eastman | June 14, 2004 at 08:36 PM
The font size has been increased twice. In fact, I am afraid that it may now be too big, depending upon your monitor and the number of pixels displayed. Feedback is appreciated.
- Dick Eastman
Posted by: Dick Eastman | June 14, 2004 at 09:15 PM
The font is now too big - on Safari for Mac OS X 10.3.4 it was initially (this morning) too small. Now this evening, it's too big - if this is a result of 2 increases, then perhaps one increase was enough?
The other "odd" thing about how this is formatted concerns the horizontal rule that appears.
It actually appears after each post, to separate the post content from the post details (Posted by xxxxxx June 14 2004 yyyyy), but to me as I scan down a page I see it as dividing the posts, so that a post starts out with
Posted by xxxxxxxx June 14 2004 yyyyyyy
then has the content of the post.
which of course is wrong.
Can the Horizontal rule be moved, or a different divider used between the actual posts?
Cheers
Roger
Posted by: Roger Moffat | June 14, 2004 at 09:50 PM
OK, I reduced the font by one size which is still larger than the original.
Thanks.
- Dick Eastman
Posted by: Dick Eastman | June 14, 2004 at 10:12 PM
Thanks Dick - that size is now quite easily readable without being too big.
What colour is the Comment text supposed to appear as?
I'm seeing it as some shade of grey (333333 ?), which I think also contributed to the difficulty of reading it when smaller. The black text (000000) I'm typing in the Comments box is smaller, but just as easily read as the larger lighter text from your last comment.
Cheers
Roger
Posted by: Roger Moffat | June 15, 2004 at 07:01 AM
So, now we have two places to check for comments on the articles? The discussion board AND the blog?
Posted by: rich | June 15, 2004 at 09:31 AM
Is there any way to see when the last post was made to an article? That way we don't have to waste our time by bringing up the article and then scrolling down to the bottom of the posts.
Posted by: rich | June 15, 2004 at 09:35 AM
I have had no problem receiving the Plus Edition of the NewsLetter, nor in reading the blog edition. It will take some getting used to the new format, but whatever solves the mailing problem is an advantage. I am an original subscriber to the NewsLetter and look forward to receiving it each week. I enjoy the reviews and have followed through with researches often and purchases several times. Keep it up!
Posted by: wka | June 15, 2004 at 11:55 AM
---> So, now we have two places to check for comments on the articles? The discussion board AND the blog?
The blog is in test mode. If it is successful and remains here, the discussion board will go away. Both fulfill roughly the same tasks, there is no (long term) need for duplication.
Posted by: Dick Eastman | June 15, 2004 at 01:21 PM
---> Is there any way to see when the last post was made to an article?
Yes.
When you go to the main page at http://blog.eogn.com, look in the left column (you will have to scroll down a bit) for the section labeled "RECENT COMMENTS." That will show you the 10 most recent comments, along witht he article titles and the names of the people posting the comments.
- Dick Eastman
Posted by: Dick Eastman | June 15, 2004 at 01:24 PM
Hiya, Dick---
I'm not particularly blog-literate (yet), but I like the beta blog format fine -- but the regular HTML format at the web site is okay, too. I depend on your "reminder" email and then read at the web site anyway, since I often do this stuff at work. (Yes, I'm back in librarian harness for awhile. . . .)
Two design comments, though:
(1) You should lose that space-wasting frame at the bottom ("Subscribe to the Plus Edition now!") As it happens, I'm using an older, lower-rez monitor at work (and an older version of IE), and I don't have a lot of screen real estate to spare.
(2) To facilitate #1, you should consider a frame at the *left* to old a non-sliding navigation bar, which could include the Plus Edition subs info. This goes for the regular web site version, too. Personally, I *hate* having to move all the way back to the top of the page to navigate. :-)
BTW, Judy and I aren't going to make it to Austin this fall after all, but we'll definitely see you at Nashville next spring!
Mike
Posted by: Michael K. Smith | June 15, 2004 at 03:55 PM
Dick,
I see the Recent Comments section, but I have to say that it is not as user-friendly as the Discussion Board. On the Discussion Board, with one click I can see who posted the last messaege in each category and the time and date they posted. On the Blog, I can see names, but don't know if they posted since I last checked in.
But blogs certainly have the buzz now, so whatever works for you is what we'll all get used to.
Posted by: Rich | June 15, 2004 at 05:04 PM
As a Macintosh OS X user, I am reading the Blog in Safari and find that it is very comfortable. I especially like the integration of comments with the articles itself.
I also tried NetNewsWire, my Mac RSS reader, with the address you gave earlier (i.e. ending in atom.xml) and find that vry convenient also. But to my surprise, it delivered the Plus Edition. I am a Plus Edition subscriber, but NetNewsWire had no way of knowing that.
I prefer both the BLOG and RSS over e-mail delivery.
Posted by: Sue Phillips | June 15, 2004 at 07:30 PM
Hello, Dick!
I'm reading the Blog with Juno 5.0, which uses a modfied version of IE (I think). No problem to speak of, except that most of the text is gray on white, which makes it look a little washed out. I find that if I increase the font size to "Very Large," however, the text is black and crisp.
I've never had any problem with receiving the Plus edition except that I did not get the first copy after I signed up for "Plus" even though you confirmed that it had been sent.
I'm somewhat puzzled by all the comments from other readers who say they would need a reminder. I look forward to receivng your newsletter each Sunday evening, and I am reasonably sure I would always go look if you switched to Blog distribution. I generally cannot go to bed Sunday night until I have gone through the newsletter!
jbs
p.s.:
Whoops. I did find a problem. I clicked on the Preview button to see what it would look like (and to make sure I had not made too many typos) ... and when I came back to click on the Post button, my required name & address info had gone blank, so that I could not send the message. (But I am not at all sure whether that is a problem with Juno or with your setup.)
Posted by: J. Bradford Seabury | June 16, 2004 at 12:14 AM
Gosh, 41 comments on this item and continuing. Will I ever be able to peruse every comment? Do I really want to? Need to? I had no problem being reminded of the availability of each Standard EGON via my earthlink mail client, even with SPAM filters turned on. I like the blog concept, but hate changes of any kind, and love the mundane, routine things of life (I am 62). Please continue your standard EGON in the old way. And if not, I hope I can keep up. Bye y'all.
Posted by: Bob Kramp | June 16, 2004 at 10:14 AM
Works very well with IE v.6+.
Manning Voorhees 16 Jun 04
Posted by: Manning Voorhees | June 16, 2004 at 12:19 PM
I very much like the blog format and hope you stick with it. However, I have just subscribed to Bloglines as suggested and can't seem to subscribe to this newsletter using it. Inputting the URL http://www.eogn.com/blog/ or http://blog.eogn.com I get the message "No feeds were found. Please verify that the website publishes an RSS feed." Am I doing something wrong?
Posted by: Ruth | June 20, 2004 at 12:16 PM
As mntiond in the earlier article, I use this address: http://eogn.typepad.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/atom.xml
Posted by: Dick Eastman | June 21, 2004 at 12:01 AM
This web version works well for me when connected to DSL. I do not like the ads but as a plus subscriber I assume I might see less. I like the use of images that reference a story.
I have no problem receiving the e-mail edition. You had something about blogs a while back and I tried to download the reader; it did not seem to work and I just did not have the time to fiddle.
I think I will be very frustrated using this web edition on my computer that just has dial up.
I also am wary of the whole blog thing because I already have information overload. Too many things clamoring for my attention. I truly envy the person whose life is so ordered that they would remember to log on at a certain time each week.
Posted by: David Lewis | June 21, 2004 at 07:00 AM
---> I do not like the ads but as a plus subscriber I assume I might see less.
What you are reading right now is the Standard Edition newsletter which will have ads. Once this is set up the way I want, I will then create a second blog for Plus Edition subscribers. It will probably require a User ID and password. It will not have any advertising.
Posted by: Dick Eastman | June 21, 2004 at 07:35 AM