Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!know!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!hayes.ims.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: akcs@ddsw1.mcs.com (BBS Public Access) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Info Needed on Prodigy Service Message-ID: <14606@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 12 Nov 90 04:03:00 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Organization: TELECOM Digest Lines: 30 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 812, Message 5 of 6 There is a lot of discussion on the Well (San Francisco BBS) concerning Prodigy. Much flaming, but some informed commentary as well. Speculation has it the published subscription numbers (500,000) are bogus. One "subscription" may mean several family ID's - all of which are included in the 500,000 figure even though they may be inactive or fictional. Prodigy users who cancelled their subscriptions and then returned months later report their old IDs are still on the directory. This suggests that cancelled subscriptions are still counted in the 500,000. The current e-mail problem at Prodigy is related to their past problems with controversial message boards. Some months ago, Prodigy removed several controversial message boards that were generating flames. This was done presumably to avoid offending advertisers and preserve the "family" image. Users of the cancelled boards were outraged, but they apparently found a work-around with e-mail. Result: specialty mailing lists flourished and e-mail traffic exploded. Some of the people who were coordinating the mailing lists were sending thousands of e-mail messages every day. This created another problem for Prodigy, which responded by charging $.25 per e-mail message after the first 30 messages in a month. This is likely to put the kibosh on the mailing lists. My take on this is that advertising and interactive communications don't mix - if "interactive" means user-to-user interaction. Prodigy never had that sort of interaction in mind, though.