[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ga] Final draft of proposed mailing list rules
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000, Kent Crispin wrote:
>Your semi-religious concept of the "true record" of an email list as
>immutable artifact does not comport with the reality. Many if not most
>lists have a background of bounced messages that never appear. There is
>no guarantee that any particular message will be seen by some, or indeed
>any of the subscribers; there is no guarantee that a message sent to a
>list will make it. What appears in an archive is *always* a selection.
The difference between the examples you give and a moderated list is that
the latter involves a gatekeeping function and monitoring mail as to what
Let us say tht there is an issue and the Names Council has requested the GA
to discuss it and put together a recommendation by a certain date.. We
many never get to that point, but let's say that the disruptors throw in so
many twists and turns that meaningful discourse is interrupted and the
deadline cannot be met. The record of the failure of the process would be
the untouched mailing list, not the moderated one.
>This metaphysical position of yours is the best argument yet I have
>seen for not archiving the ga-unfiltered list -- there would be no
>confusion about what is the "true record" if there was only one.
And that would be the one that presented ALL the messages it received.
You know, Kent, you remind me of the GS-13 geezer I worked for at Clark Air
Force Base. He was Base Historian and I was the assistant. His idea of an
historical record was to ask the various squadron commanders what they did
each quarter. Mine was to go and collect the source
documents--particularly the copies of the orders issued, financial reports,
maintenance logs, personnel rosters and accident reports.. His approach to
history got him moved to a different position (you can't get rid of civil
servants, they say) because it represented a distilled, secondary source
view of the actual activities.
My definition represents that of an historical archivist. I have
professional experience in this area, so this is not a "metaphysical
position". There's the true, untouched mailing list, which should be
email@example.com, and there's the smaller version, based on what a gatekeeper
deems relevant and other criteria. A moderated list may not reveal, say,
that one person contributes 65% of the traffic, that five people contribute
90% of all the traffic. So a moderated list presents a different skew.
Keep your finger on the delete button and voila, you have the moderated
list you want. This is neither rocket science nor shadow boxing. Over and
Ellen Rony ____ The Domain Name Handbook
Co-author ^..^ )6 http://www.domainhandbook.com
+1 415.435.5010 (oo) -^--
DOT COM is the Pig Latin of the Information Age
1999 Cyberserk Awards: http://www.domainhandbook.com/awards99.html