Vocalist.org archive


From:  "saint james" <stjames@l...>
"saint james" <stjames@l...>
Date:  Tue Nov 28, 2000  7:23 am
Subject:  Lists


Here are some observations for 10 years of being on internet lists.

Someone has to have the power to ban. Sooner or later someone will subscribe
that is nothing but trouble. There needs to be a process to deal with this.
If a thread needs to end the moderator needs to say so. Nasty remarks, ect
need a warning from the moderator. I prefer this be via private mail but in
some cases it helps for the whole list to see it.

A moderated list, where someone approves of each post, is impractical in a
list of any size. Some lists moderate all newbie posts, just the first few.
If someone gets a warning all their posts are moderated for whatever time
period. If all hell breaks loose the list can be taken to moderated
stasis, so all posts must be approved, till things die down. Gives people
time to simmer down,too. Some use a penalty box if one does something really
mean or continues to get warnings. They leave the list for a week. If this
does not work they are banned.

One liners and quoting all the original post (and often 20 replies) can be
stopped by filter rules. Set a limit for total lines, bounce attachments,
and a rule for % of quoted to original, that would do it. The sender gets a
nice e-mail telling them what they did wrong.

We have to have some rules to be civil. There must be consequences to
actions, just as in society. The goal of rules is to allow the list to flow
without any intervention (censorship, if you like). To be fair these
consequences need to be graduated, to allow everyone to make a gaff now and
then. This makes the consequences less harsh but gives people a chance. It
makes it clear what is OK and what is not.

James



emusic.com