NavList:

   

Reply

As someone who's also managed a few mailing lists (and other online
discussion groups, forums, BBSs, etc.), I can appreciate a lot of the
"thankless" work that goes on behind the scenes - so consider yourself
thanked and appreciated.  :-)

--
GregR



--- frankreed@HistoricalAtlas.net wrote:

>
> Some members of this group are still confused about the concept of
> the "list
> owner" so I feel I should take one post to describe what it is and
> what it
> is not.
>
> Myself and Dan Allen are the "managers" of NavList. Technically, MY
> position
> is "list owner" though it is not significantly different from list
> manager
> (except that I have the 'nuclear option', see below).
>
> The expression "list owner" dates from the early days of the
> Internet. A
> "mailing list" was one of the earliest forms of online collaboration
> and
> group discussion. Mailing lists are now somewhat archaic though still
>
> relatively popular in academia. Note that NavList is a "mailing list"
> only
> in part since it is quite possible to follow every discussion and
> contribute
> without using email, and there are many group members who do just
> that. A
> "mailing list" was nothing more than a system for distributing plain
> text
> messages to multiple recipients by sending and replying to a single
> "list"
> address. Mailing lists are hosted on a particular server which
> handles the
> traffic and makes sure that only members can send messages out to the
> group.
> The list management software (sometimes "listserv") on the server has
>
> various settings which are controlled by one or more managers. The
> settings
> are simple addministrative functions like allowing "digest emails"
> and
> attaching the group name at the front of each message (for example,
> the
> "[NavList nnnn]" tag on messages can be turned on or off). The first
> manager, usually the one who signs up for the list initially, is
> called the
> "list owner". There is no actual "ownership" involved and list owners
> do not
> get any special powers (except on fully moderated lists where
> messages must
> be approved before they distribute).
>
> A list owner is not a sheriff, not an overlord, not a chairman, not a
>
> president, not a leader, and not an "owner" by any normal English
> meaning of
> the word.
>
> The managers of any online community, including "list owners", have
> responsibilities and work to do. This consists in helping members
> manage
> their memberships (for example, I get about one request per month to
> swap a
> member's email to a different address, and I am happy to do that),
> trying to
> ensure that 'spam' does not get distributed (the server does most of
> this
> but Dan and I have to slog through some of it), interacting with the
> software, and rarely people, who manage the servers where the
> community is
> hosted, investigating and attempting to resolve any anomalous
> behavior (e.g.
> a message on 4 July which carried no message number but should have
> been
> number 5688), and trying to arrange the few optional settings that
> are
> available so that they are convenient for the group. In other words,
> it is
> an UNPAID position of "I.T." management and support.
>
> But wait, can't a list owner 'spank' members when they're bad? No.
> There are
> no powers of punishment, no powers to enforce any rules. In an
> unmoderated
> discussion group, there are no such powers.
>
> But wait, can't a list owner "ban" people? No. In the VERY early days
> of the
> online world, this was possible since email addresses were difficult
> to
> acquire (and expensive) and generally uniquely associated with one
> individual. But this has not been the case for well over a decade. It
> is
> technically possible to ban an email address, but this serves no
> purpose
> since anyone can sign on in less than two minutes with a new email
> address.
>
> But wait, can't a list owner annihilate the group? YES! The nuclear
> option!
> This is such a powerful power. Actually, if you think about it, it's
> a
> purely administrative power, useful only when the group transfers to
> a new
> server. Some might imagine that it could be used to destroy the
> entire
> discussion group. That's not the case because it is trivially easy to
>
> re-launch. Picture this scenario: a list owner throws a fit, kills a
> group,
> and takes his ball and goes home to sulk. List members soon discover
> that
> their group is GONE! Then someone with a brain realizes that the
> group
> consists of the members, not the server. So whoever thinks of it
> first
> simply starts a fresh group (this is trivially easy on googlegroups,
> just to
> name one example). That individual then signs up all the email
> addresses
> available from the previous list (this would miss lurkers and passive
>
> members who would have to find their own way, presumably by emailing
> people
> that they know in the earlier group) and the discussion group is back
> in
> business in a few hours. So even that seemingly important power, the
> nuclear
> option, is no power at all.
>
> But wait, can't a list owner control attachment policy? This one is a
> 'yes'
> with qualifications. Some software for managing groups provides
> extensive
> controls over this sort of thing. The software driving googlegroups
> (which
> currently hosts NavList) does not. But in any case, I consider this
> something that group members will manage all by themselves. There has
> been a
> steady rise in the size and number of attachments in the past few
> months. I
> haven't seen any complaints. If anyone is bothered, speak up and say
> so.
> That's your best defense against an overstuffed mailbox. From my own
> perspective, unless you think that everyone on NavList deserves their
> very
> own copy of some large document, it's a good idea to save big files
> for
> private emails.
>
> But wait, isn't the list owner also in charge of the archive at
> www.fer3.com/arc? That is something that I do on my own without any
> connection to list management (and btw, you can thank Dan Allen for
> storehousing messages from the early days of the group which are now
> incorporated into the archive).
>
> But wait, didn't the list owner use his "powers" to organize two
> Navigation
> Weekends at Mystic Seaport? That is something that I have done on my
> own
> without any connection to list management.
>
> So that's that. Sorry to be off-topic. I do not need any replies to
> this
> message, and I am sure that other group members would be annoyed by
> further
> discussion of this sort of "administrivia."
>
> By the way, I do understand that some folks accustomed to traditional
>
> hierarchical organizations find this concept of a list "owner" who
> owns
> nothing rather confusing. Hence this message. But a few of you have
> had this
> all explained to you SEVERAL times, and you still don't get it. It's
> your
> responsibility to learn, not anyone else's.
>
>  -FER
>
>
>
> >
>


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Navigation List archive: www.fer3.com/arc
To post, email NavList@fer3.com
To , email NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply