On Sat, 12 Nov 1994, Don Soucy wrote:
> > In my mail this immediately followed two items from Eric in response to the
> > person looking for extremely tight list security.  One person wanting
> > absolutely no outsiders and then someone who can't wait for new software
> > that will allow him easier access as an outsider.
>
> I suppose if you look on the darkside, software that helps access Listserv
> lists does make it easier to abuse our lists.  On the other hand, it
> increases access and can decentarlize control of knowledge.  Furthermore,
> I didn't come across anything in the InfoMagnet demo that I couldn't
> otherwise do with our regular listserv tools.
 
I have a very vivid imagination (I'm not saying you don't) and the first
things I think of are all the ways new items can be abused (don't have to
think about the good ways they can be used as those are usually well
documented).  Even if all InfoMagnet and other software of its sort
(and I include "Internet interface" software in that) do is what one
already can do with simple commands already available, but allows one
to do it at the press of a button, I still see enormous possibilities
for abuse, in that those out for a quick buck, who would not bother
otherwise, can use it to get in and out quickly, and have gotten their
money before they are stopped. And, if I remember correctly, the gentleman
developing InfoMagnet, when he was asking questions on this list a while
ago, indicated he wanted to have some features which would more or less
create a database of the desired information which had been gleaned from
the lists.  I'm not really a doom-n-gloomer, but I always keep it in
mind, as there are many out there who, if it's too much trouble, will
do nothing wrong, but if you make it really easy, and they think they
can get something for nothing, will try to do so.
>
> I don't consider non-subscribers to my dozen or so lists to be
> "outsiders."  In fact, one of our lists is a database with no
> subscribers.  For most of these lists, the archives are turned on.
> I'd be happy for subscribers and non-subscribers to dig through and
> see whether there are any treasures in there.  As for our confidential
> lists, we either have the archives set to private or we don't archive it
> at all.
>
> While I oppose those who would abuse Listserv subscription lists, I
> applaud software that makes it easier for more people, including my
> students and me, to take advantage of the goldmine of resources built up
> on Listserv lists.
 
There is absolutely no objection to any non subscriber searching our
notebooks for cataloging information, if that is what is needed.  The
primary listowner and I even have copies of an entire year of the
notebooks which had to be removed from the host site due to lack of
space, just in case anyone needs them (all you need do is ask, though
you might be asked why you want them).  When we have to dump, sooner
or later, another year of notebooks we will undoubtedly store those
privately also, so that those who need legitimate access to them
will have it.  Access for legitimate research purposes is not in
question, which is why our subscription, notebooks and review are still
open, though we did, reluctantly, change send so that only those directly
subscribed may post directly while all others go through me as editor.
 
>
> I'd go one step further.  I hope that InfoMagnet-search-type software is
> developed so that the Listserv goldmine can be accessed through the World
> Wide Web.
 
The various search programs now developed and being developed are fine.
I am not saying they should not exist, nor be developed.  But all such
things can be abused.  Our list, a professional discussion group of
some years standing, which has developed a certain "feel" or tradition,
and is not only required reading for some classes and a field for class
assigned projects, but also sometimes a "court of last resort" for complaint
to or about the field's "authorities,"  has clearly stated, through
surveys I have conducted, that we, the listowners, should do what we
can to block any sort of misuse of the list.  If new searching software
is used only for legitimate research in the field our list covers,  without
inappropriate use of what is found, fine, I'm all for it.  But if it
becomes obvious that it is being misused, in whatever manner, we will
have to think about blocking it as we can.
 
>
> Don Soucy
> [log in to unmask]
>
If you have bothered to read this far, a little apology for the length.
I get started on "philosophical" matters I have trouble stopping, as I
can always think of another slant on the problem which I haven't yet
mentioned.  Best I don't get started, but sometimes I can't stop myself.
   Douglas
        Douglas Winship    Austin, Texas    [log in to unmask]
                    Secondary AUTOCAT Listowner