Discussion board allows for petulant moderation if need be. http://www.alexleavitt.com
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 1:02 AM, Kevin Donovan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I like email, but would definitely use a discussion board, as well. > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:59 PM, Fred Benenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> We'll consider it, but for now -- e-mail is the most convenient, and least >> incompatible as any other medium. >> >> If you don't like the volume, feel free to create a filter or use an >> application service that supports threading. >> >> F >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 12:39 PM, Nini last name < >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> For Bog's sake, we need a frickin message board, I get so tired of >>> having to open up my fucking email every two seconds, can we has a message >>> board pretty please? >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 23:37:20 -0400 >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [FC-discuss] Liberating the FC list >>> >>> Today seems to be a great time to have joined the list. >>> >>> To what degree is the trolling really occurring? >>> >>> The phrase common sense pops up everywhere in *Free Culture*. I don't >>> believe a list necessitates moderation. Just follow Tim's Rule #6: "Don't be >>> an asshat." Simple and easy. >>> >>> Alex >>> >>> Alexander Leavitt >>> Boston University '09 >>> http://www.alexleavitt.com >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:27 PM, Fred Benenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> > wrote: >>> >>> Yes, I'm totally lost on this back and forth too. >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Nini last name < >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> Wait...what are we talking about? >>> >>> > Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:25:45 -0500 >>> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> > To: [email protected] >>> > Subject: Re: [FC-discuss] Liberating the FC list >>> >>> > >>> > > Creighton Samuels wrote: >>> > >> I think you have missed my point. It is a choice that the list >>> > >> membership *can* make, individually, without affecting the list >>> > >> membership in any other fashion. If *he* annoys you, killfile him >>> and >>> > >> he will cease to exist for you. If he annoys everyone, he will cease >>> to >>> > >> exist entirely. No rules, committees, or offensive actions required. >>> > > >>> > > Thanks for the clarification. >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > I think that I'm still being misunderstood... >>> > >>> > >>> > > I hope that people have been doing what you suggest thus far with >>> people >>> > > they don't want to read. I assume that is how most mailing lists are >>> > > read. Read what you want, don't read what you don't want. >>> > > >>> > > I think some people felt they weren't able to be effective members of >>> > > the mailing list by not reading entire weeks of email (which is what >>> > > would happen if people killfiled certain topics). >>> > > >>> > >>> > I'm not talking about actively filtering groups of posts by subject >>> > header, every email client has a file for which any post that arrives >>> from >>> > an email address listed is automaticly deleted, no operator input >>> > required. Every email list I have ever been on (I average about 250-300 >>> > emails received daily) forwards the sender's address, in part, for >>> proper >>> > killfile operation. Any post from a disruptive individual listed in the >>> > killfile will never be seen in any fashion by the reader, regardless of >>> > topic. >>> > >>> > > So yeah, I agree that ideally people should just ignore what they >>> don't >>> > > want to read. But, I also see how some people feel it has gotten out >>> of >>> > > hand (certain discussions at least). >>> > > >>> > > Anyways, I think we agree in principle, I just might be more willing >>> to >>> > > have groups set group specific guidelines. It is a trade-off though, >>> > > certainly. And I don't profess know how to handle the situation in >>> the >>> > > *best* fashion. >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > I think we are not far off, and I'm not opposed to "guidelines" in any >>> > case, provided that they are not rigid. It's just the part about >>> > "enforcement" of guidelines that I am warning against. Personally, it's >>> > not likely to affect me either way, as generally I'm a passive lurker >>> > anyway. >>> > >>> > Creighton >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Discuss mailing list >>> > [email protected] >>> > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> Stay in touch when you're away with Windows Live Messenger. IM anytime >>> you're >>> online.<http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_messenger2_072008> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> Keep your kids safer online with Windows Live Family Safety. Help >>> protect your >>> kids.<http://www.windowslive.com/family_safety/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_family_safety_072008> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
