[mailhist-discuss] Segments of email history

Suzanne Johnson fuhn at pobox.com
Fri May 25 09:44:59 PDT 2012


Some of the "events with downstream influence" may serve to help 
explain the organic growth of the Internet.  While  many of the 
iconic events and technical milestones have been cited previously, 
I've not seen much work that begins to explain that organic growth ( 
referred to most recently in a NYT editorial by Vint Cerf)

Regarding the upcoming anniversaries relating to email, perhaps a 
better understanding of these influencing events will turn up a new 
aspect of email growth that could be highlighted.

   --Suzanne Johnson






At 8:03 AM -0700 5/24/12, Dave Crocker wrote:
>On 5/23/2012 7:53 AM, Craig Partridge wrote:
>>  I think we need to have some rough sense of what we consider a "milestone",
>>  or we'll get buried in events that sound important but actually didn't make
>>  a difference in how email evolved.  As the preceding sentence suggests,
>>  I'd propose that we define a milestone as not just an "important event"
>>  (per dictionary definition) but one that had clear downstream influence.
>
>
>Sounds reasonable.
>
>It's still subjective, but gives a pragmatic bit of guidance.
>
>The modification I'll suggest is of, ummmm, retroactive downstream
>influence.   For example, some things become iconic.  They don't have
>much actual downstream effect, but folks refer back to them as
>significant.
>
>The 1978 spam is an example, IMO.  It has become a downstream
>referential anchor and so, I believe, should be cited.
>
>d/
>--
>   Dave Crocker
>   bbiw.net
>_______________________________________________
>mailhist-discuss mailing list
>mailhist-discuss at emailhistory.org
>http://emailhistory.org/mailman/listinfo/mailhist-discuss



More information about the mailhist-discuss mailing list