For the interested/curious:
2007-07-17 meeting attendance: approximately 22+ (largest in a fair while) 21 dining with us on our regular restaurant deal 1 dining with us on separate menu and pricing I think there was also a smaller bunch (approximately 4) that seemed to want to join us for dining, ... but way late and when there wasn't really any additional seating available with us - I think they went to hang out somewhere else ("lobby", bar?) and may have joined us for at least part of the talk/presentation.
list subscribers (does include also those with delivery disabled): $ wc -l */memb*`date -I` 27 balug-admin/membership_2007-07-24 287 balug-announce/membership_2007-07-24 256 balug-talk/membership_2007-07-24 And a rough approximation of unique e-mail addresses (note that some folks use unique per-list addresses): $ sort -u */membership_*`date -I` | wc -l 467
Note also that it appears we have a fairly large number of folks that are subscribed to "talk", but *NOT* subscribed to "announce". Theoretically (at least logically) that shouldn't be the case (in general - typically exceptions being per-list e-mail addresses), but it is totally under "user" control. A quick count of that: $ { sort -u balug-talk/membership_2007-07-24; cat balug-announce/membership_2007-07-24 balug-announce/membership_2007-07-24; } | sort | uniq -u | wc -l 174
Perhaps we'll address that in the future (e.g. subscribe "talk" to "announce" and remove from "announce" e-mail addresses also present on "talk") ... but for now I'm thinking we'll probably leave it as-is. Perhaps when we're about ready to move the lists ... could test that out a bit, and if such a change would work fine, put such a change in place at time of migration (of course, with such a change in place, nothing would automagically prevent an e-mail address from then subscribing to both lists ... but perhaps we could set up something that would automagically deal with that).