"Ken Dykes" says something like:
>
> >From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuq@apple.com>
>
> >I wonder if list managers get the kind of activity they look for?
>
> i suspect those who run "wide open, no rules" lists have few problems.
> those who run tighter ships will bump into more things.
If the list manager just sits around off the list and lets it run,
clockmaker style, s/he (or s/h/it for the PC-inclined) will have no
direct problems. However, if you want to keep the list worth reading, and
the list membership generally doesn't follow netiquette to keep the list
worth reading, problems will show up.
> since i don't edit/moderate the actual messages (automated digest), i demand
> a certain level of reading-for-content and general neural activity from
> list members upfront.
> (i do in a blue moon moderate "after the fact" and terminate a thread by fiat.)
I find this necessary very rarely, but unfortunately people tend to lash
out at perceived "censorship" with phrases that translate to "who gives
you the right to tell me I have to follow list guidelines and netiquette?
I have the right to flame anybody and everybody on your 100+ member list
anytime I want using the list without any accountability." Yes, I have
one of those smaller large lists... hoping to never break 500 :-)
> >(rhetorical question: are we running lists to provide a service? or because
> >it's good for the ego to be a list manager?)
>
> c) forced into it because of the inadequacies of netnews
d) bits of each. :-) At least one of my lists, maybe two, are there to
provide a semi-sheltered resource for discussions that aren't too popular
on the more widely-defined newsgroups. Others were taken over to provide
a service when the original managers became unable to actively manage or
support them.
> not ego in the sense that "look ma! i have my own empire", but rather the
> selfish "i want a service, i guess i have to create that service"
I have several lists like this. They're usually low traffic, low time
requirements to manage, but the people who participate usually appreciate
them.
> they ego-payback amortized over hours spent on servicing the list, the
> list archives, keyword database, and and Thinkage mail service impact is
> low enough to consider declaring ego insolvency.
Is there a Chapter 11 for ego bankruptcy? :-)
On the subject of AOL and special requirements, I agree with the poster
who suggested just passing along the extra requirements and letting them
fulfill the requirements via your document rather than via the AOL online
database. I don't claim to know what's best for you, and if this system
works for you go along with it, but I hate to hold users accountable for
administrative shortcomings. If you tell them "read this and follow the
instructions to get added" and they read it and follow the instructions,
they've done their share.
I've had reasonably parallel experiences with AOL and non-AOL users as
far as good users, bad users, list abuse, appropriate list use, etc...
I think that if AOL users had been added at a much slower rate, we
wouldn't have noticed. However, a lot got dumped onto the net at once, so
the influx of clueless newbies happened to be in a short period of time.
Same with the influx of clueful contributors to the net.culture.
AOL remains one of the friendlier net access points for people who don't
have access to a shell account, and some people around the world lose
their company or school accounts every year and look for some way to
access the net from B.F. Egypt ... Friendly in terms of interface, cost,
and reachability. Let's remember that not every AOLer is a clueless
infidel who uses 0 instead of O in every word... some might be pretty
significant computer users and net participants who just had to find
another on-ramp.
Enough babbling... gotta go get caffeine. :-)
Robert
--
Robert Novak (rnovak@nyx.cs.du.edu) . Manager: tiffany, perfect-beat, slade,
"You get elaborate with your lies, . tiger, galaxy, gpdg, galaxy variants
Computer dreams slip through your . GM: galaxy, g/2, galactica, blind
eyes / Baby you like to be the king of paradise / So sweet and ruthless." -TD
References:
|
|
