Kent, I say leave it as it is.
Leland. >I just found that the WAFF list now boasts over 250 email >subscribers. I also learned that only about 50 subscribers post to >the list on a regular basis. That means that roughly 80% of WAFF >subscribers are so-called 'lurkers' - people who receive the list's >email posts but who do not respond with posts of their own. > >In fairness, I'm sure many lurkers are novice fishers, fishers who >don't feel that they have anything worth contributing, or are >otherwise just plain shy. A number of lurkers are probably >now-and-then fishers or are just too darned busy to post even an >occasional email. > >However, I also know for a fact that a number of lurkers are fly >shop employees or owners. They subscribe to the list, gathering >valuable fishing information which they then feed to their customers >as a 'value-added' perk. > >For whatever reason though, lurkers take but don't give anything >back in return. > > >I personally enjoy reading the posts to the list - even the >off-subject ones, the newbie questions that we've all heard before >(and asked ourselves once upon a time), the subjects I'm not >interested in, and even the occasional spats between subscribers. I >read 'em all, delete most, and respond to a few. > >Bottom line is that I've learned quite a bit more about flyfishing >than I would have without subscribing to the list. > >But I'm beginning to wonder about all the wonderful information and >advice we've been posting. It bothers me to think we've been >innocently sharing it with others who contribute nothing back to the >group in return. Not to mention the trove of past posts available in >the searchable archives. > > >Thanks to technology and the subscribers who've generously shared >their skills, we now have the capability of 'unsubscribing' lurkers >from the list. > >We can also password-protect the archives on our web site, making >them available only to active subscribers. > >The questions though, is should we? > > >The list is only as good as the information that subscribers post to >it. If lurkers don't contribute to the group, their absence won't be >felt. > >On the other hand, restricting the list smacks to me as just another >form of elitism, the same kind of smug, 'I'm-better-than-you-are' >attitude that others think characterize we flyfishers in general. > >What do you think? > > >Kent Lufkin
