[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

How the value of this list has decreased



Title: ARCHIVES Digest - 24 Aug 2001 to 25 Aug 2001 (#2001-238)
Folks,
 
As a member of the Council Listserv committee, I will communicate your comments regarding the reply-to setting to the committee at tomorrow's (Tuesday's) Council meeting.  Until then, I cannot speak for the committee. 
 
Speaking for myself, I will note that there's no pleasing everyone.  For every person who thinks hitting the delete key is no problem, there's another who feels it's onerous for any number of reasons.  One of the largest complaints the committee heard before the change was the complaint about noise, and the reply-to sender is a fairly well recognized solution to that problem.  The problems with reply-to sender are also well recognized.
 
I'd like to remind people that the Web interface to the messages is a very useful tool.  If you haven't seen it, surf over to http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html.  You may need to create a user password to see the list, but it's a snap; you get a confirmation notice emailed to you (which usually arrives within a minute or two), at which point you can surf and post from the Web interface.  This interface gives you the option to pull the content when you want it, rather than having it pushed on you through your mailer.  The index makes it particularly easy to browse and click on only those messages you're interested in.
 
I'd also like to try to expand this conversation a bit. (The timing may not be the best, as many people will be away from their email while at the annual meeting, and I -- for one -- will be so tied up with the meeting that I will not be able to follow this thread closely.  But I will use the Web interface to review it carefully when I get back, and I hope that it will continue for a couple of weeks so that those at meeting will have a chance to participate.)
 
The reply-to setting may be something of a red herring.  One poster observed that the quality of the list, in his/her opinion, had been declining for some time before the reply-to setting was changed.  I constantly hear complaints about the quality of the list, that the list is a waste of time; I've been hearing that for long before I was on Council and long before SAA took any responsibility for the list. 
 
What I believe to be the more significant questions are, What needs to happen to make this list more valuable to you? and How can we implement those changes?  I suggest looking for non-technical (i.e., software) answers to these questions.  Assume for the sake of this discussion that all relevant replies go to the list and that noise levels are acceptable.  What would make the majority of the profession want to participate in this list (even if participation is just subscribing)? 
 
The question of implementation is particularly important.  I can think of half-a-dozen ways to improve the list, but I cannot think of who's going to do the work.  For example, having a list moderator would filter noise, but getting someone to moderate the list might require a subscription fee to compensate that someone for what is a large amount of work. Because the list is a bit anarchistic (I mean this in the sense that there is no formal government, and that its success depends on the subscribers rather than an authority), how can subscribers take responsibility for the quality and success of this list?
 
I want to stress that in asking these questions I am not trying to set up a dodge of the reply-to discussion.  I will see that the list committee seriously considers the concerns about the change of the reply-to setting.
 
Richard Pearce-Moses