I thought I would reply to this from a "list owner" and technical
point of view. I feel this is relevant because its how all the lists
@lyris.coles.org.uk are setup (unless the list owner starts to do
something different).
> The only way to have a list "Just for Parkies" is to have the
> administrator monitor subscription requests and only approve
> those determined to be a PWP. But, even that wouldn't be enough.
> Human nature being what it is, along with the fact that no two
> people are going to have the same, thoughts, ideas, and opinions,
> people are going to have differences. These differences are go-
> ing to turn into arguments, and (sometimes) a fight (flame-war)
> -- even between fellow "Parkies."
Flame wars are one way of dealing with it.
On my more "commercial" lists (about Lotus Notes) I have a rule that
if there's any policing to be done, its done by me. Complaints come
to me, not to the list, I make a decision and communicate that.
Sometimes I ask for the lists's feeling on a particular issue.
This works very well, and the lists stay on track.
I feel comfortable doing this on commercial lists because:
- its my server, and I told people the rules when they joined
- most people are reading from work, and keeping the list relevant is
important
- there are a lot of attempts to join the list, spam it, then leave
- the technology allows them me do it (see below)
I'm not sure this attitude would be appropriate for a self-help list
- but I don't feel comfortable with where PARKINSN has ended up
either - which I guess just shows that doing this stuff is really
hard :-)
So listowners of lists @lyris.coles.org.uk decide their own policies
as they wish. It quite interesting that each has its own flavor (as
much as I can see, given they're all in languages I don't speak).
Some of this variation may even been down to whatever is appropriate
for the national culture, I don't know.
> Once some 'Netizens figure out that the only thing separating
> them from others in cyber-space is a wire and some distance, they
> get a little more courageous. So, the semi-anonymity provided by
> the keyboard and monitor, gives most people a sense of courage to
> say things they might not say in real-life. The only way to deal
> with this anonymous-courage is to moderate the list. Let the
> moderator decide what gets posted and what doesn't.
>
> Then, it only gets worse. I've seen people who feel that they
> have been cyber-slighted, quickly find out about proxy servers,
> anonymous re-mailers, and the like. And then use the technology
> to lurk, watch for an "opening," and then start getting their cy-
> ber-revenge. (I'll admit I am describing a worst case scenario,
> but ...)
There's some additional tweaks on moderation that some list servers
give you which help tremendously (we use http://www.lyris.com).
Firstly, you can set it to moderate (say) the first 2 posts someone
makes to the list. That means conversation carries on as normal, but
new people are moderated. This is useful because they may not know
the culture of the list and may need guidance in asking their
question - and people are pretty much always grateful to be helped
out in this way. Think of it as a host introducing you to people at
parties. Of course, this facility is also useful if someone has
joined the list just to create trouble.
Secondly, you can decide that a individual needs to always be
moderated. This is useful when you've got a "difficult" person on
your hands, but don't want to boot them off the list.
Finally, to ensure moderation doesn't slow the list down completely,
you can specify a number of moderators, and you can also say that if
a message hasn't been moderated within 24 hours or whatever, then it
should be automatically approved.
Using these tools, you can gently keep the list on track. No one gets
offended, the list stays on track, eveyone's happy. Its not heavy
handed, just keeping the house in order - think like a committee
chairman. I have rarely used these tools, or had to discipline a list
member in any way.
> The only thing that I have ever seen have any effect follows
> the old saw: "Ignore it and it will go away." And, that is why
> most e-mail client software have "filters" in them these days.
> You just put the e-mail address of the culprit in your filter-
> list and it gets filtered out from your incoming mail stream and
> you never see it (with any luck).
This is based on the assumption that:
- people know how to setup filters
- they are prepared to spend the time figuring out the appropriate
filters for PARKINSN
The first one is not a safe assumption given the nature of this list.
For the second one, even I must plead guilty here. I did once think
of building some filters for the archive to get it down to manageable
size, but I suspect I would *really* *really* *really* upset some
people :-( Plus it would have taken more time than I was prepared to
put in.
> I've been on the 'Net now for some seven or eight years. And,
> in that time-frame, I've been on more than my share of mailing
> lists. No matter what the topic, they all have their good times
> and their bad times, as someone recently described, like a sine-
> wave. And, as I've described before, it's the inherent character
> or basic constitution (natue) of something formidably difficult
> to control or deal with (the beast).
Yeah, its hard. But it doesn't have to be this much off topic :-(
Simon
--
--------- My opinions are my own, NIP's opinions are theirs ----------
Simon J. Coles Email: [log in to unmask]
New Information Paradigms Work Phone: +44 1344 753703
http://www.nipltd.com/ Work Fax: +44 1344 753742
=============== Life is too precious to take seriously ===============
