On 9/7/07, Brian Leach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dawn (and fellow list members)
>
> I appreciate where you're coming from, but
>
> 1. Please remember that the U2UG are the stewards and not the owners of this 
> list. The U2UG has agreed to run the lists according to the wishes of the 
> list membership, but the Board has no mandate to decide on the policies of 
> the list, or which lists should come and go.

That does not quite align with my recollections, Brian.  Clif was the
former trustee and moderator and he turned that responsibility over to
the U2UG so that the board formed a list moderation sub-committee.
So, I believe that Chuck B. works with the instructions set by the
U2UG board sub-committee, which is tasked with the responsibility for
such policies by the u2-users membership.  As a member of the u2-users
list and of U2UG, it seems that several of us would like the policies
changed, so I asked the board, whose subcommittee handles such
policies, to take this up, assuming that the board is willing to do
so.

> 2. Like most of us, I've been a member of the lists longer than the U2UG has 
> been around, and I remember the situation that led to the u2-community being 
> formed. There was a lot of ill-will and some ugly postings from those 
> complaining about the signal to noise ratio. Today, with the very occasional 
> exception, we have a well moderated and courteous list of which we can all be 
> proud.

As Clif mentioned, many of those who complained have either left the
list, have better toolsets now, or have refined their skills in
quickly filtering for those postings of interest.  So, I think it
makes sense to revisit this, and I am pretty sure that is the right of
the board to do so.

> 3. The REAL problem as I see it, is not the fact that topics are sent across 
> to u2-community,  but the fact that they die when they get there.

No, I am absolutely certain that is not the real problem ;-)

> I would rather see the u2-community list being actively used,

I am guessing, but not quite as certain, that this will never happen.

> with more traffic and discussions taking place about what is happening in our 
> community (and welcoming all kinds of topics), which is what it was designed 
> for.
>
> The only problem with u2-community is that too many on THIS list don't bother 
> to subscribe to it and keep any useful topics alive.
>
> 4. As for the AD in the subject line: it is a useful convenience that makes 
> it easy to filter the mail by subject line. So those who don't want to see 
> them can choose to filter them out. Those of us who do, can continue to read 
> them without having to skip tags in the messages themselves. Which should 
> keep everyone happy all round (apart from a few curmudgeonly old malcontents 
> <grin>). But it's not enough of an issue to rewrite the rule book over.

I agree, but I saw the issue being addressed as one related to
excessive moderation, not due to Chuck's attempts to enforce the
guidelines, but due to the guidelines themselves.  I think it is time
to rewrite the rules, kill u2-community, and make u2-users the
community.  One cannot say to a non-virtual group (one where people
see each other) that is working on any issues, including very serious
ones, that they should do so without any community building at all, no
smiles, no winks, no meta-discussions, but that another group could be
formed for those who want to do community building for this group.
That is just nonsensical and not likely to work.  If I am in the
minority in this opinion, then turn it down, but I suspect that the
list would be well-served by these slight revisions to the policies.

I told Chuck B that I didn't like the feeling of a list where I might
get shut down with just about any topic of interest to me, all of
which would be related to U2.  He asked if I was afraid of him and I
said that was not the issue, but that it was a real downer, whether
the right word would be humiliating or something short of that, to
have your conversation cut off.  It makes for an unfriendly list, in
my opinion.  I'm a girl, however, and given recent research on
differences in brain activity, it is possible that is relevant.
Cheers  --dawn

> My (rapidly decreasing in real terms) 2 pence.
>
> Brian
>


-- 
Dawn M. Wolthuis
Tincat Group, Inc.

Take and give some delight today
-------
u2-users mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/

Reply via email to