On Sat, 18 Jun 1994 08:52:07 EDT Anthea Tillyer said:
>I have the extreme misfortune to own a large (3,800 +) academically-oriented
>list. In the past, most discussion on it has been relatively academic and
>relevant to the stated purpose of the list, and the average of postings each
>day was about 25 - 30. However, two things have happened recently: the
>number of postings has increased explosively and their pedagogical value has
>declined precipitously. In fact, about 85% of our postings are worthless.
>
>(Please do not suggest a moderated or edited list....that is out of the
>question for reasons of philosophy and time)
/* delete */
>But supposing I DON'T issue the "FREE" command? What happens to the held
>messages? Do they get held over to the next day (and added to that day's
>total)? Do they get discarded at the end of the day?
>
>If the held messages are simply discarded when no "FREE" command is
>issued, I think that I might have the solution to our "list-pollution"
>problem! I would like to hear from owners who have some experience with
>this. Here is my idea: Rather than RAISE the daily threshold to
>accommodate the increased traffic, how about LOWERING it?
/* delete */
>One additional note: the situation with my list is complicated further in
>that it is supported by a large federal grant, so continued postings of
>totally irrelevant garbage can easily jeopardize the continued financial
>support of the list.
I'm confused by several points of Anthea's note. Most notably, I'm puzzled
by her reluctance to moderate her list. Quite clearly she's ready to
arbitrarily delete notes which arrive later in the day if she's hoping that
LISTSERV purges notes that are held into the new day.
Even more puzzling is that she has Federal monetary support to run this
list and yet claims she has not time to moderate the list. I'll admit I'm
envious of anyone who can divert my tax dollars to her purse for a
electronic mailing list, but beyond my jealousy, just what is the grant
for if not for making time to run the list well?
Clearly I don't completely know what's going on here, any my comments may
sound harsher than is merited due to circumstances I'm not aware of.
Anthea, moderation of some sort is clearly in order. Maybe you close
posting to non-subscribers and make all subscriptions by owner. Kill any
Usenet gateway you have, too, when you do this. Yes, handling subscription
requests takes time. You've already invested time in starting the list and
getting the grant, we're not talking about that much more time here!
If you'd even consider shutting down and creating a new list, this step
is in the same vein.
Frankly, though, I think you need Send=Editor, no matter how distasteful
you find it. Whether you mail rejection notices for personal attacks or
just flush them is your perogitive, but clearly you need to do something,
and action is preferable to most over passive resistance, such as hoping
that LISTSERV will flush some notes every day without any blood on your
hands.
It would be nice if list owners who try to straighten out a list didn't get
nastygrams. It'd be nice if citizens who use peer pressure didn't get
harassed for doing so. It'd be nice if people who wish strangers nice days
didn't get dirty or suspicious looks. The point is, you cared once enough
to put a lot of time and energy into setting this up; I find your feigned
apathy or philosophical position very inconsistent. It's an ugly position,
but you do have the tools and the authority to clean it up.
Just one person's opinion,
Nick
* Intelligence demands reasons, not rules.
|
