Winship wrote:

> Got stuck with the dirty end of the stick as a subsequent listowner
> hmm?
>
> Too bad the university won't back you up as the civil rights/freedom
> of speech argument is total hogwash.  Subscribers have threatened that
> on other lists but where the listowner has done nothing wrong and has
> the backing of the university the pest never sues, despite the vilest
> threats, as knows can't win and will cost a *lot* of money out of his
> pocket.  Most often they make a lot of noise but actually taking it to
> court is rare; they'ld rather just make a lot of trouble with, they
> think, no cost to them.

I agree but that's where we are. I don't blame the university either. Why should
they get involved in problems on a mailing list they have no interest in? Just
having their listserv administrator have to answer emails over problems on the
list costs them money. I'm thankful they allow us on their servers at all. I
don't think the person making the threats of a lawsuit would have the means to
sue. He made comments about the ACLU taking the case but I think that was just
wishful thinking on his part.

> Can't tell you where to find another host site, and if you are honest
> about the situation I doubt you will find anyone willing to take you.

I agree with this too, but I feel we have to be honest about the situation if
asked. And to be sure the host will back us up I need ask which gives the
potential host a clue about the problems.

> You didn't start the list. OK.  You are, though, now the listowner, with
> the sanction of your host site.   That means are listOWNER.  Get it
> through the heads of your subscribers that you will inforce rules, and
> that at times your rules may seem arbitrary they are still the rules.
> This authoritarian approach works well if you are evenhanded, but it
> can quickly go a skew if you noticeably play favorites, in which case
> you will get a revolt.

--
Walter Potter