Talk:Bibliophile mailing list

Comments
Is this mailing list in any way relevant or is the article just free advertising for a commercial service? Zokzok (talk) 10:30, 24 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Relevancy: If you collect books, sell books, or simply like talking about books, this is a good site to which to subscribe. Content is about evenly divided between sellers offering FS items and everyone who cares to either starting or contributing to conversational/informational threads. The list is currently run by a money-allergic old American expat reprobate living in Mexico.Booknookoc (talk) 01:59, 27 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually after all these years it does sound like a commercial service doesn't it? The list predates facebook and twitter and all the other social networking sites. (Are the wikipedia entries for facebook and craigslist considered commercial service articles?) the List predates Amazon, and Barnes and Noble and Borders online services, it even predates Alibris, Biblio.com, and all of those databasees.  For the 1st twelve years the bibliophile list was predominantly the same conversations you now see on facebook with a moderate amount of sales.  These days it is evenly divided by sales and informational with the occasional conversational thread.  So, if you think it's a commercial service than that is a gross overstatement; I can tell you from experience that it is not a profit making service. But indeed it's communal aspect has dwindled in importance in the shadow of what has superseded it. I gotta go look to see if there is a Compuserve article....which was what predated the Bibliophile list.  Personally I think it is sad that obscure internet history isn't more documented. How many things do you know that have been on the internet this long? When it is gone, which will happen one day, and the archive is shuffled into the back of some server somewhere, who will remember it? It was pretty important to the history of bookselling on the internet, but I guess you had to be there. EraserGirl (talk) 20:40, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Commericalism?
I do not see the relevance for an encyclopaedic entry. It appears to me also that this article is just highly commercial. I do not care for social media, but the wide impact it has created deems it relevant for entry. I do not see the relevance for this at all, especially with a link and price quote for membership. In my opinion there is nothing here beyond this piece being an advertisement for their list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onthispage (talk • contribs) 19:55, 16 January 2012 (UTC)