LSTOWN-L Archives

LISTSERV List Owners' Forum

LSTOWN-L

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Aldo-Pier Solari <[log in to unmask]>
Sat, 15 Apr 1995 14:28:33 GMT
text/plain (42 lines)
]Trish Forrest <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
 
][...] I don't like the idea  either  and I have prepared a 'standard
]msg' to send out.  This worked out well until I received  a  request
]from  a list owner to filter out an entire commercial network due to
]abuse on one list.   I'm  still  uncomfortable with the 'concept' of
]filtering out everyone on a network because of one person.  Since  I
]received  no reply from the postmaster (except a "Got your mail, get
]back to.") I guess they didn't care one way or the other.
 
There  are perhaps two aspects worth discussing here:
 
(1) Punishment of  whole  groups  is  illegal  in  most  "civilized"
countries.   If  the  owner  required  you  to  filter a whole group
(already subscribed to the conference) based upon a few individual's
behaviour, it may be considered  as  a  group punishment.  We need a
code  for  listowners  based  on  International   law.    Also,   an
International  board  of  Senior  listowners  with who would discuss
conflicts and ethical issues and give recommendations;
 
(2)  I  have run several times into the AOL and COMPUSERVE problems:
In FISH-ECOLOGY,  frequency  of  bad  e-discipline  is significantly
higher among XX.COM subscribers than in any other group:  Bounces  [
mailbox  full,  user  unknown (cause they pay no fee)], don't unsub,
don't read aims &  rules,  etc.   Furthermore, spamming and the like
comes to networks more often from enterprises with  a  .COM  access.
However,  there are very serious subscribers too (retired academics,
journalists, freelance writers, teachers, etc.) behind XX.COM.  They
are highly motivated and they  _pay_  for the relatively high volume
of traffic.
 
I have contacted .COM Postmasters several times: The  problems  will
only  grow  if  they  do not actively educate their users.  Perhaps,
letting them know in advance that "if statistics get worse" they may
not be allowed into the  academic  networks may set some pressure on
them.
 
Anyhow, it looks unethical to me  to  deny/delete  access  to  whole
groups. It is group punishment.
 
    Aldo-P. Solari/FISH-ECOLOGY.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2