> Too many of the subscribers to list-managers think that they own "their"
> lists. A more positive deal is that the participant group has some
> minimal level of self-organization and the list manager functions more
> nearly as trustee than as autocrat.
List managers are free to run their lists as they see fit. That includes
acting as autocrat if they feel it's appropriate -- which I do. If people
don't like how I run my lists, nothing is preventing them from starting up
their own list with a management style they're more confortable with.
I'm subscribed to a number of lists that are wonderful "playgrounds" but
which have little to do with their chartered topic. Seems to me that we
could use a few more autocrats out there.
::: Lazlo (firstname.lastname@example.org; http://www.swcp.com/lazlo)