--On Friday, November 22, 2002 7:44 PM -0800 "Roger B.A. Klorese"
<rogerk@queernet.org> wrote:
> That's fine for many, even most, lists.
>
> We host a few where the goal is comunity, even "jabber," not technical or
> focused discussion. The owners of some of these lists even impose a
> minimum daily or weekly posting requirement; others don't go so far, but
> want to make it clear to everyone that if they intend to stick around and
> overhear what others are saying it requires a deliberate "allow me to
> stay in the room even if I'm not talking" process.
That is all fine and well, but from a List-Managers standpoint, the
governing principle seems to me to be that list software should allow these
choices to be made on a per-list basis, not interfere with them or attempt
to mandate a "one size fits all" answer.
With specific reference to the double-confirm issue, it is appropriate for
some lists, some clienteles, and some situations, and inappropriate for
others. List administrators should be able to choose whether they want it
or not.
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
