I don¹t KNOW if Villanova has the ultimate responsibility for monitoring on the content on the UC Listserv right now. If any neighbors new or long-standing would join the UC Listserv would NEVER know that somewhere down the Villanova was the owner of the domain unless it is posted. It hasn¹t been since 1994.
However, anyone joining the new UC Neighbors Listserv would immediately know the listserv has an URL that on Penn¹s domain owns.. Many assumptions could be inferred from that simple fact. On 7/30/07 12:39 PM, "Anthony West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wilma, > > I don't know. Is Villanova responsible for our content, right now, on UC-list? > > Your second point does make some sense to me. But how to control it? Large > universities are mare's nests of email accounts and websites. You can find > some pretty bizarre pages on some of them. > > Maybe Kyle's listserve should include some sort of standard disclaimer of > university affiliation for walk-ins. Or maybe .... > > While we're on it, how did UC-list come to be called "purple" instead of > "villanova"? > > -- Tony West > >> Re: [UC] True nature of UC-list I don¹t think Penn is sponsoring the group. >> What I meant is they are the owner of the domain in which gives them a >> certain responsibility for its content, doesn¹t it. >> >> As for your second point about group credibility, it is rather the appearance >> of credibility. That is to say, if I was looking for a listserv forum i this >> area and I ran across the UC Neighbors and saw upenn.edu in its address, I >> would probably think if I didn¹t know better that this Neighbors listserv is >> affiliated with the university because it is under their domain. >> >> If I see a forum under cbsnews.com, or citibank.com or harvard.edu, I would >> most likely assume these would under their domains and subject to all >> regulations therein. >> >> Wilma > >
