pehaps somebody know that there are private tools for exchange of file (
peer to peer).
Gigatribe is one of them. http://www.gigatribe.com/tour/accueil.php?lg=us
It is a software in English / Français / Español / Svenska / Nederlands,
and with it i can
give access to one or more of my folders. When you have a count (it's
free) and when i have added your name, you can go and take what you
want in my folders.
only archeolozoogists i (or other member) invite can acess to the the
And the informations are on your computer and there is no limits of
file (1 giga byte if you want). only yours guest can acess to yours files.
It seems to be a very efficient way to solve our problem of exchange of
file and informations. Your PDFs are always available for others members
and automatically !
You have also a little chat ( perso or general) which allow you to ask
others members a publication or ...
We can create a private network and informations are encoded. We can do
what we want on, because it is not on the web...
This tool or another could be a good add to zooarch o for a small group.
[log in to unmask]
Ingénieur de recherche INRAP,
Laboratoire d'archéozoologie de Compiègne,
UMR 5197 du CNRS, Archéozoologie, histoire des sociétés humaines et des
CRAVO, 21 rue des Cordeliers, 60200 Compiègne, France,
tel : 33 (0)3 44 23 28 10
visitez le site
Umberto Albarella a écrit :
> Dear Zooarchers,
> With papers being more and more commonly produced and distributed in a pdf
> format it is likely that requests for them will multiply on Zooarch, a trend
> that we have seen in recent months. This is useful, and represents a very good
> role that Zooarch can play. However, inevitably some people - sometime many -
> will follow that initial request with messages requesting that paper too. This
> makes sense, but it may become slightly irritating to people who will get their
> inboxes filled up with 'me too, please' messages. So, here is a suggestion:
> following the initial request for a paper, could others who are also interested
> in getting hold of a copy address their request exclusively to the original
> requester rather than the whole list? And could this person - provided that
> s/he could get hold of a copy - please make sure that s/he forwards the article
> to the additional requesters? This seems a small price to pay for having
> obtained the paper in the first instance. I hope this sounds reasonable to you,
> and a convenient way to avoid inbox-filling and overlaps of efforts.
> Alternative suggestions are of course welcome.