Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 15:28:50 -0500 (EST)
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at KeithLynch.net>
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] WSFA lists
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>

Just to clarify:  This list is no longer an official WSFA function.
I will continue to maintain it, and its archives on KeithLynch.net,
indefinitely, for the use of all interested past and present WSFA
members.

There is already an announcements-only list, intended only for
announcements of changes in meeting locations, and for locations of
Fifth Friday events, funerals of members, etc.  I don't think any
sensible person would object if every member were automatically placed
on it (as is done in PRSFS), but in keeping with my attempt to be
correcter than correct (fat lot of good it did me) I've only added
people to it who explicitly asked to be on it, plus those who
unsubscribed from this list who didn't indicate that they also also
wished to unsubscribe from the urgent announcements list, and who
didn't (as far as I know) move out of the area.  Everything sent to
that list is CCd to this list.

Lee also has her own announcements-only list, intended for
announcements of free movie tickets, etc.  I've heard contradictory
things about whether everything sent to that list is CCd to this list.

There's also a list for the Capclave committee.  I assume Elspeth
runs it.

WSFA is of course perfectly free to create any number of new email
lists, with whatever rules WSFA likes.  If one of them is on Yahoo,
all subscribers should be aware of Yahoo's terms and conditions;
some members won't consent to them.  Also, some members won't have
anything to do with Yahoo for various reasons, for instance because
they recently outed a dissident Chinese to the Communist Chinese
government to undergo reeducation for his "crime" of free speech.

I also think it's a bad idea to have a policy of shutting down
a discussion list when things get emotional.  People should be
encouraged to calm down before posting.  Knowing that the discussion
is likely to be shut off if they don't post right away will strongly
discourage this, and will lead to more and worse arguments.

Here's a short glossary, just to make sure that when WSFA discusses
lists, everyone's speaking the same language:

* Unmoderated:  Any subscriber can post any message at any time, and
  it will go directly to all subscribers without being held for approval.
  This list has always been unmoderated.

* Open:  Previously, some lists were open to posts from everyone, not
  just subscribers.  Spammers made this unworkable.  This list has always
  been semi-open, in that any past or present WSFA member may post to
  it, not just subscribers.  (Of course their name or an email address
  known to me must be on the From: line, otherwise my software doesn't
  know that they're a past or present member.)

* Moderated:  Messages are held for moderator approval.  There may be
  one or more moderators, each of whom has the power to approve messages.
  (In principle, a list could be set up so that two of them must approve
  each message, but I've never heard of this being done.)  In WSFA's
  current climate, anyone who volunteers to be moderator is putting
  his head on the chopping block; people *will* strongly disagree with
  whatever decisions he makes.

* Semi-moderated:  Messages from trusted subscribers go directly to all
  subscribers; messages from others subscribers are held for moderator
  approval.  Once again, this is a hot potato.  Who decides which
  subscribers are trusted?

* Retro-moderated:  Messages can be rescinded by moderators after being
  posted.  This isn't possible with email, only with newsgroup postings, so
  if anyone suggests setting up a retro-moderated list, they're confused.

* Digestified:  All messages sent to the list in a day are sent
  together to all subscribers in one large message in the middle
  of the night.  It's possible for a list to be digestified for some
  users, but not others.  Digestification is independent of moderation.