Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Mon, 11 Sep 2000 11:28:44 -0700 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Dear LSTOWN-L Folks,
On one list I'm using an identity checking routine* that,
while quite laborious, is working as I expected to
eliminate self-serving chest pounding from one so-called
"support" group. It also reduces general lurking and
those who are not *serious* about seeking membership.
*Historical reasons for implementing this procedure
are supplied below.
Unfortunately, this identity checking method also
discourages the some of the most timid and some
"professionals" in other fields who have little
understanding of their Internet identity.
Procedure
What I do is ask them to privately identify themselves
off-list to my private e-mail address. This often allows
me to see their "injection" IP address, >and< makes
an explicit "contract" between me and the new member
that they are who they say they are.
I ask for three things: 1. their full name, 2. full names
of any others who will likely be reading the mail sent
to that account, and 3. a "very brief" reason why they
want to join.
Results
So far, there have been NO unwanted advertisements
from the so-called "support" group in question, and
discussion seems to be a little more focused.
*Historical Background
After three years and hundreds of thousands of
message deliveries for one so-called support group,
I finally pressed (privately and politely) my long term
request for a "return" link from their Web page.
They responded by filing over a dozen complaints
with our LISTSERV host ( *.edu) and before long I
was spending unreasonable time on "dealing" with
their irrelevant complaints rather than leading the
discussion.
I moved one related list to another *.edu LISTSERV,
and moved the 'controversial' group to eGroups.Com,
to eliminate the wasted time with this "support"
group's harassment.
No, eGroups is not even close to being in the same
class, but it was the best I could do on short notice.
Because I establish the identity of newcomers as
they enter the group, there has been no need to
figure out identities later.
Although this identity checking is a lot of work, it
has worked much as I expected, and the list has
continued grow at two to three new members per
week.
I hope this helps (IHTH).
Pax,
Ballew Kinnaman <[log in to unmask]> 206/463-2322
Discussion list owner:
Allergy ---> http://www.Immune.Com/allergy/index.html
Arthritis ---> http://www.Emissary.Net/arthritis/index.html
PCHealth ---> http://www.Emissary.Net/pchealth/index.html
Latex Allergy ---> http://www.Immune.Com/rubber/index.html
Thyroid ---> http://www.Emissary.Net/thyroid/index.html
|
|
|