Jim wrote:
> You are now at the "see below" references above. Should the
> existence and operation of TIPS, a very important resource to
> many of us, depend on a single individual and a single
> institution? Is there any way that we can broaden the base for
> the list, without compromising (in my view) its quality and
> openness? One small step might be to have some kind of Virtual
> Advisory Board, perhaps elected if we could work out the
> mechanics, that would contribute advice and/or vote on issues
> such as this. Or perhaps some of the responsibilities could be
> shared. Perhaps there could be an associate list owner to deal
> with some issues (e.g., the MS Associate to deal with postings by
> a certain person ... this is a joke ... teaching tip: sometimes
> you have to explain to the class that something is meant as a
> joke).
A few suggestions:
At one time I was the co-list owner of the Rights-L list. This was a high
traffic list addressing issues of human rights. The list itself was hosted
by a publicly funded college although none of the co-list owners (there
were three of us) was actually connected to the institution; space and
Majordomo (the list server in use at the school) access were made
available by the school as a courtesy.
We had three co-list owners because the list _was_ controversial and
while there are occasions where one or more individuals may have to be
removed from a list for their behavior (particularly on an open
politically oriented list), it was felt totally unreasonable for any one
individual to have the responsibility for that decision.
As co-list owners all of us were experienced at operating lists in terms
of acting as list owners and as list managers. Rather than divide
responsibilities we elected to share the common tasks with each of us
spending certain days handling routine duties. In the event of
controversial decisions, however, we had a policy of first asking the
membership of the list to voice _their_ opinions and later (if no clear
consensus emerged) basing our decision on the majority view of the list
owners.
Our system worked quite well for that kind of list, and provided both an
open environment for our list members and dependable access to a list
owner at virtually any time a problem arose (something not always possible
with a single list owner).
Another system I have had success with was one in which a single list
owner functioned to maintain and operate the list but a very clear policy
existed as to the precise behaviors that would result in suspension or
removal from the list. On that list a group of three members were chosen
by the membership itself to serve as "advisors." The list owner made all
day-to-day decisions, but when a decision involving changes to policy,
list operations (other than those necessitated by changes to the software
of course) or possible expulsion of a list member arose, the three member
advisory group had the authority to over-ride the decision of the list
owner.
I've stated before that as this list exists on a publicly funded system,
the list owner is _not_ in the same position as one who operates private
lists on his or her own equipment. For example, I run a number of private
email lists for specialized support, political, and academic groups on my
own machines. Because I pay all costs of the hardware, software, and
connection out of my own pocket, I have every legitimate right to make all
decisions concerning those lists. This isn't the case for a public list
such as those I mentioned above--or TIPS!
Bill has done a good job of managing the list, and should be applauded
for doing so. But simply because he is the list owner does _not_ give him
the right to consider it his own list. It isn't. It belongs to the public
in general, and to the members in particular. NO list housed on the
computers of a public institution is the property of an individual. The
term "list owner" is simply a convention, far more accurate is "list
maintainer" which implies only operational control, not actual regulatory
control.
This said, and considering the statements that the list may well "go
away" with the software change, I have this suggestion: If any of the
members of the list teach at institutions which host email lists (most
large universities and many smaller ones do so) and would be willing to
discuss the subject of providing long term hosting for TIPS on their
institution's machines, I would be more than glad to help set up any of
the above systems for the list and to serve in any capacity from simply
offering support for the transition to serving as a co-list owner or list
manager subject to an advisory board (or a member of such a board).
This list is a valuable resource that shouldn't be allowed to disappear.
And if there is a possibility of that happening (as Bill indicates there
is), the time to address that problem is not at the last minute (when a
new host may not be found) but now while the time exists to make a careful
and effective transition to a new system--something that _always_ has some
"bugs" to work out before a list is actually operational and can better be
done while the old list is still running well.
I would offer to host the list on my own machines, but I suspect that
many of the people on this list would be uncomfortable with it being on a
private system where a single individual has total control of the
operations. If, however, it _does_ come to the point that no other server
is available, I'll be glad to do so until such time as public resources
can be located in order to prevent it from disappearing completely.
> Perhaps we could come up with other suggestions. I know that
> Bill received some support for awhile from APA, but maybe a more
> formal group could actually get on-going support from APA, APS,
> CPA, or multiple organizations? Such support could lessen our
> dependence on the sometimes-strained goodwill of a single person
> or institution.
Actually financial support for a list is totally unnecessary. If an
institution is willing to devote a relatively small amount of system
resources to the list (a few GB of storage space and list owner access to
the list management software) no further costs are involved. I run about
15 lists right now (some of which are higher traffic than TIPS) on an
older Pentium Pro 200 machine with only 10 GB of total space--and those
lists have the additional features of Web interfaces, news reader access,
email aliasing (for the support group lists), a web site dedicated to the
lists, and detailed web or email based database search capabilities--none
of which are necessary for TIPS. Once the space is allocated by an
institution actual maintenance has no costs associated with it at all,
apart from the time commitment of the list manager.
> I am certain that so many of us appreciate deeply the value of
> TIPS that it may be worth examining how we can best ensure its
> continued operation and, perhaps at the same time, relieve some
> of the pressure on Bill.
Hopefully these suggestions will help a bit.
Rick
--
Rick Adams
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Department of Social Sciences
Jackson Community College, Jackson, MI
"... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds
will be the love you leave behind when you're gone."
Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible"
