on 8/9/01 7:12 PM, [log in to unmask] at [log in to unmask] wrote:
> Candice,
> A couple of points. I don't think the word "eavesdropping"
> is the right one. It has a bad connotation.
Right, that's what I was responding to in Henry's opinion that archives
should be made public for the sake of those who want to read up on our
"flare-ups," which I found distasteful and hardly a good reason for
reopening our archives when set against such reasons as privacy, security,
and spamming for keeping them closed. I don't think we have any obligation
to consider the advantages of public archives to anyone but the Poetryetc
membership.
> (BTW, may I say
> that those oddly worded & punning subject headings, while seen as
> creative & funny to the listees, are not helpful to us eavesdroppers.)
Wish I could take the credit for them, but Poetryetc subject headings
are a roll-your-own product.
> I also wouldn't describe the NewPoetry List as 'private'. Anyone
> who goes to the webpage can get on the list instantly without a prior
> approval process. But of course this could change, if need be.
Well, when I went to the webpage and clicked on "subscribe" on July 8th,
I didn't get on the list instantly. Later I received an e-mail "confirmation
of subscription" notice (numbered) to which I had to reply by sending
"confirm" along with that number, and then it was another two hours later
before I received the New-Po welcome message. (With all public lists to
which I've subscribed, on the other hand, the process is entirely automated
and does happen instantly.) I also noticed in the configuration of the
New-Po header that preceded the welcome message something unusual for even
private discussion lists and standard for "announcements-only" lists: the
"Sender" [i.e., poster] setting was "new-poetry-admin" rather than the usual
"private" or "member" setting. Does it mean what it seems to mean--that all
posts to New-Po are subject to administrative review rather than going
straight from the poster to the list?
If so, that would be one way of ensuring that nothing problematic ever
reached your public archives, although (as you and I know) some problematic
material did post and become archived, so I wonder what purpose the
admin-review setting serves. Also wonder how you _would_ "describe the
NewPoetry List."
Candice
|