[Wpfw-lsb] RE: How does the LSB want to accept new
mailinglistmembers?
thomas ruffin
iska666 at earthlink.net
Wed Jun 2 08:25:00 PDT 2004
dear rupert:
this is what i mean. all day long, we could talk about this. the board
members get enough email from each others. sometimes, scores of emails
from each other. we do not need more scrutiny about preliminary ideas.
thomas ruffin
> [Original Message]
> From: D. N. Russo <dnrusso at earthlink.net>
> To: <wpfw-lsb at lists.mutualaid.org>
> Date: 6/2/2004 10:49:28 AM
> Subject: [Wpfw-lsb] RE: How does the LSB want to accept new
mailinglistmembers?
>
>
> >Hello all:
> >
> >I hope this finds all well.
> >
> >I don't think we should make individual 'exceptions' or decisions to
allow
> >people to join the list; either make it open to anyone, or not. So I'd
> >suggest we not allow the programmer in question to join, but instead
make
> >a decision and apply it to everyone.
> >
> >If we follow through with the idea that transparency is appropriate, we
> >could allow anyone to subscribe on a read-only basis, and not add any
> >postings or much administrative burden to the list. This is my
suggestion.
> >
> >In fact this would represent very little change from how the list exists
> >now----anyone can go to the the list and read the archives at any time,
> >and there are people who do. And of course anyone on the list can
forward
> >any of the postings, and there are people who do. So you see, we have
> >transparency already. If this is news to you, welcome to the
> >internet! By allowing folks to register on a read-only basis we would
> >only be making it a bit more convenient for them to do what they already
> >are doing.
> >
> >I don't think we need multiple lists including a closed one, because
> >indeed members will continue to distribute postings from it, so it
> >wouldn't be confidential either. Although setting up and administering
> >more lists might be a great way to use up some of those surplus
volunteer
> >hours that we have. A second LSB list would also give folks another
much
> >needed place to post their messages (If some of you are looking for more
> >Emails, maybe we could set up a special list just for you). We are
> >already accessible; many of us published Email addresses during the
> >election and subsequently, we do provide monthly opportunity for
Community
> >Comment at our meetings, and many of us participate in the OurWPFW, and
> >other lists.
> >
> >Maybe we could devote several hours of our surplus meeting and EMail
time
> >to the topic?
> >
> >Seriously though, I'd like to add an item to our next LSB meeting
agenda,
> >and at that time move that we keep this existing list and allow anyone
to
> >subscribe on a read-only basis.
> >
> >Again I hope this finds all well. And THANKS in advance to our members
> >who will shortly be on their way to Houston. I look forward to seeing
> >everyone on the 9th.
> >
> >Peace,
> >
> >Mike Gillispie
> >
> >
> >
> >>From: "D. N. Russo" <dnrusso at earthlink.net>
> >>To: wpfw-lsb at lists.mutualaid.org
> >>Subject: RE: [Wpfw-lsb] How does the LSB want to accept new mailinglist
> >>members?
> >>Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 14:24:06 -0400
> >>
> >>At 04:37 PM 6/1/2004 +0000, you wrote:
> >>>To All,
> >>> I'm a few days behind on e-mailing, so please excuse how long it's
> >>> taken me to get to this.
> >>> I would like to hear how others feel about this, but here is my
> >>> thinking--I think we should have a list that is just a workspace for
> >>> us, for lsb business. However, we should also have one that others
can
> >>> post on so that we can communicate with the public. I don't really
> >>> care which one is which, but I do think both are neccesary. Rupert,
if
> >>> I approve the membership for the programmer, who is in fact working
> >>> with the programming committee right now, and should have some way to
> >>> work with us on-line, could you set up a separate one just for work
for
> >>> us? Thanks,
> >>> Sarah
> >>
> >>Hi Sarah and Co.
> >>I set up the wpfw-lsb mailing list as the workspace for the board. I
feel
> >>that there are plenty of other already existing public forums for the
> >>board and everyone to talk about WPFW and Pacifica. There's a yahoo
> >>group, and several other lists, i think. I'm not going to setup or
admin
> >>another such public forum. But I'm sure someone else will if people
feel
> >>that they need a free-for-all area just to talk about the WPFW LSB
issues.
> >>
> >>Sarah, It sounds like you agree with OPTION #2 of my proposal, is that
> >>correct?
> >>As list admin, I think the wpfw-lsb mailing list can grow in
subscribers
> >>on a case by case basis based on the criteria for joining the list
being
> >>"active participation at the committee level of the LSB." I think
that's
> >>a fair next step in list growth and management that does not threaten
the
> >>effectiveness of the tool for communication. And since all messages by
> >>those non-LSB subscribers are moderated anyway, it's all fine. List
> >>Moderation, if you have never done it before, can be an extremely
> >>laborious, time-consuming task when there is robust participation of
50+
> >>people. That's why I'm being rather conservative with my position on
the
> >>list subscription policy. It's open for discussion, obviously.
> >>
> >>So far, the 3 responses I've received, people like OPTION #2.
> >>
> >>FYI, after the station management completes the upgrade to the website
> >>which is in-progress, the mailing list info links, including the
archive
> >>URL will be very prominent on the front page of the WPFW website. I
> >>predict we will have more public demand to subscribe to the mailing
list.
> >>So, perhaps OPTION #2 is too conservative and we will need to consider
it
> >>further. Imagine for a moment that we received 200 requests from the
> >>public to join the mailing list. That would be a success in expanding
our
> >>mission. The only change will be in the time spent in list moderation
> >>which is no big deal, really, if it's shared between a few people.
> >>Currently, Jim Brown, Sarah Bittle and Tracy Lewis have the
"moderator"
> >>password, and I get the messages as well when there are messages
waiting
> >>for approval/denial.
> >>
> >>I thus feel compelled to offer an OPTION #3?
> >>3) "Anyone can subscribe to the wpfw-lsb mailing list. Only LSB
members'
> >>messages are automatically sent to the list without moderation. All
other
> >>messages are moderated, or approved by members of the LSB who are
> >>designated by entire LSB. The public is encouraged to use the mailing
> >>list to write the board with their opinions and feedback and offer help
> >>at the committee level. We encourage contributors to keep their posts
> >>relevant to the WPFW local station and the agenda of the LSB. Any
abusive
> >>postings, SPAM, or personal attacks sent to the list will be discarded.
> >>All list archives are readable at
> >>http://lists.mutualaid.org/pipermail/wpfw-lsb/ The only benefit of
> >>subscribing to the list is that you get the emails directly sent to
you."
> >>
> >>I would propose this language be used on the WPFW website when the
public
> >>reads about the wpfw-lsb mailing list so that they know what it's about
> >>and that the list policy if clear to everyone.
> >>
> >>Remember, you all can always change the subscription policy later if it
> >>doesn't suit you.
> >>
> >>Comments?
> >>thanks,
> >>-rupert
> >>
> >>
> >>>>From: "D. N. Russo" <dnrusso at earthlink.net>
> >>>>To: wpfw-lsb at lists.mutualaid.org
> >>>>Subject: [Wpfw-lsb] How does the LSB want to accept new mailing list
> >>>>members?
> >>>>Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 19:57:30 -0400
> >>>>
> >>>>Hello LSB,
> >>>>I told myself we'd deal with this bridge when we come to it...
> >>>>We've had our first non-board member ask to subscribe to the mailing
> >>>>list. A WPFW programmer wants to receive messages.
> >>>>
> >>>>I initially thought that the public could simply read the archives
and
> >>>>mail messages to the list address, thus keeping the subscribers
limited
> >>>>to the board members only. It would be less administrative on me,
too.
> >>>>But the mailing list software allows us to deal with this in several
> >>>>ways. You can allow the public to subscribe to the wpfw-lsb mailing
> >>>>list, if you would like. I can set all non-LSB list subscribers to
have
> >>>>their messages moderated, so that email traffic doesn't get out of
> >>>>control, and the moderators approve whatever isn't spam or
> >>>>inappropriate for the list. That way, people who are interested in
> >>>>getting the LSB email can do so and can essentially linger, read and
be
> >>>>in-the-know. They can accomplish the same thing by going to the
> >>>>archives page, though, without adding more subscriber maintenance.
> >>>>http://lists.mutualaid.org/pipermail/wpfw-lsb/
> >>>>
> >>>>Basically, my only concern is that the list becomes yet another
public
> >>>>discussion forum, which is not the intent of this mailing list, in my
> >>>>opinion. It's the Board's workspace to make communications efficient
> >>>>and the archives should reflect the LSB in discussion in between
> >>>>meetings. Not the LSB talking/debating/arguing with the public. But
you
> >>>>all need to decide how much public level participation you want on
this
> >>>>list. There are other forums for people to discuss WPFW. Do you want
> >>>>this mailing list to be open game for drawn out conversations and
> >>>>debate, or do you want it to be a controlled environment where
business
> >>>>can be done?
> >>>>
> >>>>1) The current list subscription policy is: the public can email the
> >>>>list without a problem at wpfw-lsb at lists.mutualaid.org and they can
> >>>>read the archives from the web. Moderators are supposed to approve
the
> >>>>letters from the public addressed to the LSB.
> >>>>
> >>>>2) If the policy is that members of the public can subscribe to
receive
> >>>>emails only and all email is moderated, then that would be a slight
> >>>>variation that the technology does provide for and I can manage. This
> >>>>would make it easier for the public to pay attention to what the
board
> >>>>is saying, and be able to contribute at the committee level. As
> >>>>Programmers and other WPFW family begin joining the committees, then
it
> >>>>makes sense to adapt the policy.
> >>>>
> >>>>It sounds like the LSB has evolved to the point where OPTION #2 is
> >>>>favorable.
> >>>>
> >>>>I want access to the LSB to be as open as possible, while at the same
> >>>>time not allowing the list to become an inefficient tool.
> >>>>
> >>>>thanks for your feedback. you can email me OFFlist if you would like.
> >>>>If you like OPTION 1 or OPTION 2, please say so. If you have an
> >>>>alternative proposal, please write it out. Questions welcome.
> >>>>
> >>>>Rupert
> >>>>
> >>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>Wpfw-lsb mailing list
> >>>>Wpfw-lsb at lists.mutualaid.org
> >>>>http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/wpfw-lsb
> >>>>free hosting provided by http://www.mutualaid.org/
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Wpfw-lsb mailing list
> >>Wpfw-lsb at lists.mutualaid.org
> >>http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/wpfw-lsb
> >>free hosting provided by http://www.mutualaid.org/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wpfw-lsb mailing list
> Wpfw-lsb at lists.mutualaid.org
> http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/wpfw-lsb
> free hosting provided by http://www.mutualaid.org/
More information about the Wpfw-lsb
mailing list