"John W. Redelfs" <TSJWR@acad1.alaska.edu> writes:
>
> I am a self-confessed "control freak" managing a list for religious
> discussion among a group of people who belong to a minority faith that
> inspires in its followers a high degree of involvement. May I suggest
> that in some situations a list must be "owned" rather than
> "maintained" depending on the kind of list it is.
>
> My list which is private but not moderated on Majordomo, split off from
> a much larger list over a year ago and has developed a culture of its
> own. The entire purpose of the list is to provide a refuge or
> sanctuary from a certain kind of subtle proselytizing by members of
> our faith that are determined to pollute our denomination with such
> modern, "worldly" concepts as feminism and the gay rights agenda among
> others. The list fails to serve as a refuge from these ideas and the
> people promoting these ideas on the Internet unless a high degree of
> control is exercised.
These comments made me think about the lists I "own" and "manage" and
"facilitate". I started an open list about Feminist Critiques of Science
(called FIST - Feminism in/and science and technology) a while back, and
the first spate of messages included many from men questioning the
validity of these critiques. But the purpose of the list was similar to
that posed above, as a refuge, where we didn't have to constantly justify
our reasons for exsistence, and could thus move forward. I had to become
somewhat of a control freak myself, and really clamp down on some
subscribers, and set up some "rules" for conversation, which all new
subscribers get when they subscribe. The list is still open, and I haven't
had to douse a flame war in a while. In many ways I consider myself
"listowner" of this list.
Another list I started had no such controversial overtones, so that I am
able to take a fairly hands off approach. I think of myself in terms of
this list as a "list maintainer", although I do have a professional stake
in the list. (It is on minority health issues - my area of research)
The third list is one that is a relatively closed, private list. I was a
subscriber, when the original founders of the list lost their ability to
maintain the list because of a job change. They needed someone to do it,
and I volunteered. In this case I think of myself as the "list
facilitator" - someone who puts out electronic fires, and helps screen
subscribers. But the subscribers themselves (among whom I consider myself)
determine the policies and fate of the list.
In other words, I expect each list, person running the list, and content
and potential controversy of the list will determine how heavy a hand one
has to place on the list in question. I don't think it is possible or
necessary (or even desireable) to try and come up with a standard
relationship. I think that it *is* useful to think about some broad
frameworks in which we should operate.
Michelle
---------------------------------------------------------------
Michelle Murrain, Ph.D. email or finger:
School of Natural Science mpmNS@hamp.hampshire.edu
Hampshire College mmurrain@family.hampshire.edu
Amherst, MA 01002
URL:http://www.hampshire.edu/Hampshire/ns/html/Murrain.html
|
|
