support problem

[Alex van den Bogaerdt]

Hi,

Not much has happened in the past months but now a change will happen
one way or the other.

As you are probably well aware, the volunteer team is often not much
more than just me myself and I. And I am going to quit as well.

I think the council should decide how to continue with support, but
of course I will not participate as a council member in that discussion.

There are too much posts to the RT system which fall in one or more
of the following categories:

* a duplicate of a post to spf-help
* a disgruntled person wishing to vent his/her anger
* a lazy person which just copies the message and demands an explanation
* spam

Sorry, but I cannot cope with this anymore.

I see three possible scenarios:

1: forget about RT (or alike) and let people post to spf-help
2: continue with RT (or alike) but with different people. If this is the
way to go, ensure that a backlog of +2weeks does not occur anymore
3: let me continue but for a small fee to set my mind at ease.

Let me explain #3: I think this will overcome many of the problems I
encounter. For all four categories I mentioned I can live with it if
they pay for the right to be annoying. Not that I expect many tickets
to be opened, in fact I rely on that.

Don't get me wrong: there are many questions asked which do not fall
in these categories. The fee should be low enough not to be a problem
for those who want to ask a question in private. Then again the fee
should be high enough so that people will think twice before posting.

It currently is not an option to ask Koen to change the RT setup. And
since I am, most of the time, the only volunteer, I think it is okay
when I come up with a completely different way of providing support,
provided of course that this is the way to go.

Alex
P.S.
I will continue as before during the remainder of 2007.

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=76427667-b256f9
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

[Stuart D. Gathman]

Post by Alex van den Bogaerdt
3: let me continue but for a small fee to set my mind at ease.

Sounds good to me. Better have paypal or something. No one can be bothered
to pay a small invoice.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <***@bmsi.com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77080345-1686b6
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

[Alex van den Bogaerdt]

Post by Stuart D. Gathman

Post by Alex van den Bogaerdt
3: let me continue but for a small fee to set my mind at ease.

Sounds good to me. Better have paypal or something. No one can be bothered
to pay a small invoice.

Of course.

But this is not the main issue. More important is the decision to
move away (or not!) from free support. That's why I think a council
meeting is in order, one I will not attent as a council member due
to possible conflict of interest.

Things to discuss (IMHO) are:
* making this change yes or no
* if no: how to ensure a timely response to those seeking help
* if yes: fine details: how much influence should the council have,
are you willing to give this all out to just one volunteer

regards
Alex

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77346202-730ec9
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

[Frank Ellermann]

More important is the decision to move away (or not!) from
free support.

SPF help is free for anybody (managing to subscribe to it, or
to find a subscribed "posting allowed" account, e.g. on GMane).

What you're talking about is the ticket system, and from what
you wrote I conclude that it's in essence down to one person
(you) answering tickets.

I think a council meeting is in order, one I will not attent
as a council member due to possible conflict of interest.

As far as I'm concerned you need about "3 out of 5" votes for
your proposal - ideally after posting the proposal on the SPF
discuss list for review by the community.

If you say it's a conflict of interests make it "3 out of 4",
with Stuart as a tentative first. [[JFTR, I did this kind of
arithmetic before moving a "4 out of 5" erratum to confirmed.
And I'm still waiting for the critical 3rd vote on two other
issues, Authentication-Results and the "IETF other lists".]]

* making this change yes or no
* if no: how to ensure a timely response to those seeking help
* if yes: fine details: how much influence should the council
have, are you willing to give this all out to just one
volunteer

IMHO: At some point the discussion should be continued on the
list for discussions - taking silence as "decide what you like"
is okay for me, I like to do what I like, but not necessarily
with some "hat on" ;-)

IMHO: The openspf site shouldn't *directly* sell anything, no
matter what it is, implementations, support, test suites, or a
future SPF seal of approval. The Web site can of course have
links to such offers or services, it already has many links in
this direction.

The "trouble ticket generator" is at the moment an ordinary Web
form, free for everybody (please correct me if I'm wrong). If
that's changed say by adding PayPal links I propose to move the
form to personal subpages of the folks dealing with it (e.g. to
an Alex/support page, but there could be also a Koen/support
page, and how you get the Paypal link right is your business ;-)

At the place where the official "free" Web form used to be we
can have links to your page, Koen's (hypothetical) page, and of
course also links to SPF forums, especially the "SPF help" list.

Technical details to be hashed out on the Webmaster list, does
that make sense for your proposal ? [[Again JFTR, I created a
bunch of "not strictly SPF" subpages, if you think that any of
these pages are good enough for an "official" page just move it,
IIRC "thingy" (the Wiki) automatically creates redirections for
moved pages.]]

Frank

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77412550-a5b0a8
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

[Scott Kitterman]

Post by Frank Ellermann
If you say it's a conflict of interests make it "3 out of 4",
with Stuart as a tentative first. [[JFTR, I did this kind of
arithmetic before moving a "4 out of 5" erratum to confirmed.
And I'm still waiting for the critical 3rd vote on two other
issues, Authentication-Results and the "IETF other lists".]]

I'm starting to see the wisdom of IETF other. Can we register ourselves as
IETF other right now and then point the auth results people at spf-discuss as
another place they need to visit?

Scott K

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77431682-dbf1dc
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

[Alex van den Bogaerdt]

Post by Frank Ellermann

More important is the decision to move away (or not!) from
free support.

SPF help is free for anybody (managing to subscribe to it, or
to find a subscribed "posting allowed" account, e.g. on GMane).

Correct.

Post by Frank Ellermann
What you're talking about is the ticket system, and from what
you wrote I conclude that it's in essence down to one person
(you) answering tickets.

Correct, and yes, mostly.

Post by Frank Ellermann
IMHO: The openspf site shouldn't *directly* sell anything, no
matter what it is, implementations, support, test suites, or a
future SPF seal of approval. The Web site can of course have
links to such offers or services, it already has many links in
this direction.

These are the details I was talking about. Those should be discussed
once it is decided to make a change at all.

I want to stress that it's perfectly OK with me if the "old way"
continues, but in that case you will have to find another volunteer
who will take tickets. I was away for some time and nobody else
picked up new tickets, resulting in quite a backlog.

I need less tickets, and of a higher quality. I think I can achieve
that, at least enough, with my proposal.

Post by Frank Ellermann
The "trouble ticket generator" is at the moment an ordinary Web
form, free for everybody (please correct me if I'm wrong). If
that's changed say by adding PayPal links I propose to move the
form to personal subpages of the folks dealing with it (e.g. to
an Alex/support page, but there could be also a Koen/support
page, and how you get the Paypal link right is your business ;-)

This is completely in line with what I was thinking about. However,
this is also a detail to be discussed (if necessary) after deciding
change is going to happen at all.

As far as I'm concerned, it is the council making the decision to
alter the significant part of the project (free undisclosed tickets)
and I, Koen (maybe), whoever, will do the rest.

Post by Frank Ellermann
Technical details to be hashed out on the Webmaster list, does
that make sense for your proposal ?

I don't think so. Or I don't see it right now.

Alex

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77432587-5e347c
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

[Frank Ellermann]

Post by Alex van den Bogaerdt

Post by Frank Ellermann
IMHO: The openspf site shouldn't *directly* sell anything, no
matter what it is, implementations, support, test suites, or a
future SPF seal of approval. The Web site can of course have
links to such offers or services, it already has many links in
this direction.

These are the details I was talking about. Those should be
discussed once it is decided to make a change at all.
I want to stress that it's perfectly OK with me if the "old
way" continues, but in that case you will have to find another
volunteer who will take tickets. I was away for some time and
nobody else picked up new tickets, resulting in quite a backlog.

Yes, you asked more than once for new volunteers, and nobody did.
Sparing you the reasons why *I* didn't, but I certainly saw your
requests, and we also discussed the issue on IRC some months ago.

Post by Alex van den Bogaerdt
I need less tickets, and of a higher quality. I think I can
achieve that, at least enough, with my proposal.

Good, then go for it. Maybe you need an okay from Koen, and the
Council can "officially" support your plan to some degree wrt
the openspf site - if you want a Paypal link on a new page below
"Alex" it's actually Julian who might know how to arrange this.

If it doesn't work directly with "thingy". E.g. I've never used
my earbone shell account, and my svn + earbone passwords are on
a harddisk I can't read "at the moment" - I desperately try to
delay the point in time when I might be forced to say "never" :-|

["Alex" subpage with Paypal or similar]

Post by Alex van den Bogaerdt
This is completely in line with what I was thinking about.
However, this is also a detail to be discussed (if necessary)
after deciding change is going to happen at all.

Nobody can produce a new volunteer out of thin air, e.g. Steve
(a regular on the "SPF help" list) should have also seen your
repeated requests. So "change is going to happen" even without
a decision, simply because you say that you have enough of the
"old way" (free RT support).

Post by Alex van den Bogaerdt
As far as I'm concerned, it is the council making the decision
to alter the significant part of the project (free undisclosed
tickets) and I, Koen (maybe), whoever, will do the rest.

Maybe I miss your point here. If you prefer to continue the RT
service as some kind of paid service the Council can in essence
wish you "good luck", but after that it's not more part of the
project, it's something like the list of "SPF Professionals" if
that still exists. IIRC I could add me to this list, but not
because I'm a Council member at the moment, and also not because
the Council decides it, but because somebody is the maintainer
of this list and might decree that I know what SPF is. IOW that
is Scott's (or Julian's, I forgot who it was) baby, not a part
of the project "for Council review".

Likewise I post SPF options drafts when I feel like it, and at
some point in time I might ask the SPF community if they wish
to "officially" support it, because that could be good when I
try to find a "sponsor" in the IETF (Chris or Lisa - I cannot
shepherd my own drafts, an obvious conflict of interests... :-)

The Council mainly offered me an SVN account for these drafts
(and I managed to lose the password together with my old box),
and it should decide what the community wishes if I'd ask them
to support it "officially". Otherwise that's my baby, and if
say Stuart has a problem with what I hope explains the redirect=
behaviour of op=auth he'd tell me directly or on an SPF list,
he doesn't need a Council resolution for this.

Just some examples, because I'm not sure how similar our ideas
are, about what authority the Council really has.

Post by Alex van den Bogaerdt

Post by Frank Ellermann
Technical details to be hashed out on the Webmaster list,
does that make sense for your proposal ?

I don't think so. Or I don't see it right now.

Details about moving the support form to one of your subpages
assuming that you get a clear "go" for your proposal. Please
post it on the "discuss" list when it's more or less ready -
from my POV I'm not supposed to decide about "official" issues
without input from the community (or rather an opportunity for
community input).

Frank

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77439396-4719b6
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

[Alex van den Bogaerdt]

Post by Stuart D. Gathman
There will still be free support. Just not a free RT ticket system.

Correct. Bad wording on my end.

Also note that this does not necessarily mean there needs to be a
link to a replacement.

Post by Stuart D. Gathman

Post by Alex van den Bogaerdt
I want to stress that it's perfectly OK with me if the "old
way" continues, but in that case you will have to find another
volunteer who will take tickets. I was away for some time and
nobody else picked up new tickets, resulting in quite a backlog.

Yes, you asked more than once for new volunteers, and nobody did.

This wouldn't be fair to those who did try and help. Their efforts
are appreciated. But somehow they lost interest in a couple of weeks
maybe months.

If one of them, some of them, all of them, want to take over then
that's fine with me. By all means do continue the current way,
but please do check in every few days. If not, then keeping RT
active is no option and the link has to go. Otherwise people will
be disappointed.

Post by Stuart D. Gathman
Good, then go for it. Maybe you need an okay from Koen, and the
Council can "officially" support your plan to some degree wrt
the openspf site - if you want a Paypal link on a new page below
"Alex" it's actually Julian who might know how to arrange this.

OK, the details again. What I am suggesting is to modify the form
on http://www.openspf.org/Contact and no longer accept tickets
"support request" and maybe also "other". Instead, explain very
briefly entirely free support has ceased and is replaced by nearly
free support. Maybe point the user to /Forums again, although I will
do so as well.

I suggest a new level 3 header "technical support" for this.

Then have a link to my page (not on openspf, my own) which I am
preparing (I need some more time to finish this). Here I will handle
paypal and such, which is not only going to stop spammers but
hopefully also makes people think twice before they ask questions
like "I want to return my $device", "I am not a spammer, why are
you blocking me", "my webpage doesn't work anymore" and various
other unrelated rants.

If other ex-volunteers want to join, fine as well, but what I am
currently implementing is personal only, so everybody would need
to roll their own webpage and such.

Post by Stuart D. Gathman

Post by Alex van den Bogaerdt
As far as I'm concerned, it is the council making the decision
to alter the significant part of the project (free undisclosed
tickets) and I, Koen (maybe), whoever, will do the rest.

Maybe I miss your point here. If you prefer to continue the RT
service as some kind of paid service the Council can in essence
wish you "good luck"

yeah you do and no I don't :-)

wrt Koen: I asked him and he's OK with the change (if any). He's not
currently going to spend time on this.

The main reason why I think the council should decide is that from
an early moment in the project it was possible for users to ask about
tickets -in private- and -for free- (combined). This combination will
no longer be possible and I consider it to be more than just a minor
change. But so far nobody seems to object so if everybody is OK with
what I propose, then I'm not going to force a meeting over this.
[I think I've seen everyone but Julian, correct?]

If everybody agrees then I will send out a message tonite to spf-help
and spf-discuss, briefly explaining the situation and asking if
anyone wants to take over the lead position.

Alex

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77527900-522a89
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

[Stuart D. Gathman]

Post by Alex van den Bogaerdt
The main reason why I think the council should decide is that from
an early moment in the project it was possible for users to ask about
tickets -in private- and -for free- (combined). This combination will
no longer be possible and I consider it to be more than just a minor
change. But so far nobody seems to object so if everybody is OK with
what I propose, then I'm not going to force a meeting over this.

If it's not too much trouble to keep the free ticket page going,
it could have a disclaimer about being short on volunteers and a link
to your paid ticket page. This would be reasonably friendly with some
indication of queue length on the free page.

Just an idea. Without *some* volunteers the free page is useless.

Another idea. Instead of Alex reminding us about ridiculous queue
lengths, an automatic email when queue gets long, sent once per week.
Frankly, I get busy and forget to check RT. I would have a few minutes
to weed spam at least. That doesn't require much thought.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <***@bmsi.com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77676094-ea81a3
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

[Alex van den Bogaerdt]

Post by Stuart D. Gathman
If it's not too much trouble to keep the free ticket page going,
it could have a disclaimer about being short on volunteers and a link
to your paid ticket page. This would be reasonably friendly with some
indication of queue length on the free page.

Mind that Koen has indicated (to me) that he's not able to spend
much time (if at all) to make changes.

This probably means it would require wget and some scripting from
your end.

Post by Stuart D. Gathman
Just an idea. Without *some* volunteers the free page is useless.

As I promised earlier I will send a message to spf-help and
spf-discuss later this night.

Post by Stuart D. Gathman
Another idea. Instead of Alex reminding us about ridiculous queue
lengths, an automatic email when queue gets long, sent once per week.
Frankly, I get busy and forget to check RT. I would have a few minutes
to weed spam at least. That doesn't require much thought.

A week is too long IMHO.

And this doesn't address the other problems:
* duplicate tickets (question also asked on spf-help)
* "I demand YOU fix YOUR problem right NOW" type of messages
* i bought a fridg bat it dousnt work i want to return it

I'm sure it wasn't a fridge. I'm not sure about what it was. But it
doesn't really matter, you got the picture.

cheers,
Alex

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77714062-d8e3cf
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

[Frank Ellermann]

More important is the decision to move away (or not!) from
free support.

SPF help is free for anybody (managing to subscribe to it, or
to find a subscribed "posting allowed" account, e.g. on GMane).

What you're talking about is the ticket system, and from what
you wrote I conclude that it's in essence down to one person
(you) answering tickets.

I think a council meeting is in order, one I will not attent
as a council member due to possible conflict of interest.

As far as I'm concerned you need about "3 out of 5" votes for
your proposal - ideally after posting the proposal on the SPF
discuss list for review by the community.

If you say it's a conflict of interests make it "3 out of 4",
with Stuart as a tentative first. [[JFTR, I did this kind of
arithmetic before moving a "4 out of 5" erratum to confirmed.
And I'm still waiting for the critical 3rd vote on two other
issues, Authentication-Results and the "IETF other lists".]]

* making this change yes or no
* if no: how to ensure a timely response to those seeking help
* if yes: fine details: how much influence should the council
have, are you willing to give this all out to just one
volunteer

IMHO: At some point the discussion should be continued on the
list for discussions - taking silence as "decide what you like"
is okay for me, I like to do what I like, but not necessarily
with some "hat on" ;-)

IMHO: The openspf site shouldn't *directly* sell anything, no
matter what it is, implementations, support, test suites, or a
future SPF seal of approval. The Web site can of course have
links to such offers or services, it already has many links in
this direction.

The "trouble ticket generator" is at the moment an ordinary Web
form, free for everybody (please correct me if I'm wrong). If
that's changed say by adding PayPal links I propose to move the
form to personal subpages of the folks dealing with it (e.g. to
an Alex/support page, but there could be also a Koen/support
page, and how you get the Paypal link right is your business ;-)

At the place where the official "free" Web form used to be we
can have links to your page, Koen's (hypothetical) page, and of
course also links to SPF forums, especially the "SPF help" list.

Technical details to be hashed out on the Webmaster list, does
that make sense for your proposal ? [[Again JFTR, I created a
bunch of "not strictly SPF" subpages, if you think that any of
these pages are good enough for an "official" page just move it,
IIRC "thingy" (the Wiki) automatically creates redirections for
moved pages.]]

Frank

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77412644-4886cb
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

[Frank Ellermann]

More important is the decision to move away (or not!) from
free support.

SPF help is free for anybody (managing to subscribe to it, or
to find a subscribed "posting allowed" account, e.g. on GMane).

What you're talking about is the ticket system, and from what
you wrote I conclude that it's in essence down to one person
(you) answering tickets.

I think a council meeting is in order, one I will not attent
as a council member due to possible conflict of interest.

As far as I'm concerned you need about "3 out of 5" votes for
your proposal - ideally after posting the proposal on the SPF
discuss list for review by the community.

If you say it's a conflict of interests make it "3 out of 4",
with Stuart as a tentative first. [[JFTR, I did this kind of
arithmetic before moving a "4 out of 5" erratum to confirmed.
And I'm still waiting for the critical 3rd vote on two other
issues, Authentication-Results and the "IETF other lists".]]

* making this change yes or no
* if no: how to ensure a timely response to those seeking help
* if yes: fine details: how much influence should the council
have, are you willing to give this all out to just one
volunteer

IMHO: At some point the discussion should be continued on the
list for discussions - taking silence as "decide what you like"
is okay for me, I like to do what I like, but not necessarily
with some "hat on" ;-)

IMHO: The openspf site shouldn't *directly* sell anything, no
matter what it is, implementations, support, test suites, or a
future SPF seal of approval. The Web site can of course have
links to such offers or services, it already has many links in
this direction.

The "trouble ticket generator" is at the moment an ordinary Web
form, free for everybody (please correct me if I'm wrong). If
that's changed say by adding PayPal links I propose to move the
form to personal subpages of the folks dealing with it (e.g. to
an Alex/support page, but there could be also a Koen/support
page, and how you get the Paypal link right is your business ;-)

At the place where the official "free" Web form used to be we
can have links to your page, Koen's (hypothetical) page, and of
course also links to SPF forums, especially the "SPF help" list.

Technical details to be hashed out on the Webmaster list, does
that make sense for your proposal ? [[Again JFTR, I created a
bunch of "not strictly SPF" subpages, if you think that any of
these pages are good enough for an "official" page just move it,
IIRC "thingy" (the Wiki) automatically creates redirections for
moved pages.]]

Frank

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77412596-430ffd
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

[Frank Ellermann]

Frank Ellermann will learn how to use whatever
passes as "IMAP" between OE and Gmail, sorry :-(

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77416138-f1e246
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

[Stuart D. Gathman]

Post by Alex van den Bogaerdt
But this is not the main issue. More important is the decision to
move away (or not!) from free support. That's why I think a council

There will still be free support. Just not a free RT ticket system.
Free support requires volunteers, and if the volunteers aren't
available, it is kind of like socialized health care (free if you
can get it). I am a volunteer - but only sporadically have time to
weed the backlog. And you are correct, it is mostly spam. A paypal
link would certainly weed out the spam, or at least make it worth
your while :-)
--
Stuart D. Gathman <***@bmsi.com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77500584-a1cd11
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com