Insofar as the question of moderation, I would suggest that it would be an
immense admin burden on the moderator - even worse if there was an
expectation to edit the content. I don't see that as a good use of time.
However, I like Ken's approach: gentle reminders of what the list is about.
Putting out an annual or semiannual posting with rules-and-policies would
not work. I get those from other lists, and delete them unread because
they're "canned". Ken's responses have been much more pertinent to current
discussions and perceived problems therein, and so are much more likely to
be read and followed by the list membership.
Just my 2 cents.
Cheers.
Fil Salustri
Francois-Xavier Nsenga (fme) wrote:
> Dear Ken,
>
> You wrote:
>
> (...)
>
>>Perhaps it is time for us to consider these issues.
>>
>>So far, we have very few rules. Anyone may launch a thread on any
>>topic at any time. While we have a specific range of topics related
>>to design research and doctoral education in design, all topics are
>>welcome. Anyone may write at length in careful developed, well
>>referenced posts. No one is required to write scholarly or
>
> scientific notes: direct person comments are welcome. No one may call
> for a thread to end while any list member wishes to carry it forward.
>
>>The JISC rules govern all JISCMAIL lists. Apart from technical
>
> rules, only one JISCMAIL rule affects on-list protocol. This is the
> fact that JISCMAIL list owners are the final governing authority on
> any list.
> (...)
>
>
>>The question of list etiquette and ethics probably involves more
>>issues than whether or not an "avatar" is acceptable here. This
>
> would
>
>>include some of the issues I raised during and after the on-line
>>conference. And it might well include issues raised off-list by
>>subscribers who have occasionally felt uncomfortable with the list.
>>
>>I wanted to take a moment to reflect on Alan Sokal's post and to
>>suggest that it may be a good moment to reflect on etiquette and
>>ethics in several dimensions.
>>
>>What do others think?
>>
>>Best regards,
>>
>>Ken
>>
>
>
>
>
> Just a month after I joined the list two years ago, among a few other
> thoughts I submitted the following:
>
> (...)
> "Based on my one month experience in the discussion online list,
> (...) I then propose (...) to appoint a moderator whose mandate will
> be, not to censor but to keep every intervention in the line of the
> above stated aim or need. This will prevent inevitable digressions or
> insufficiently substantiated threads to be put up for discussion. In
> my opinion, open, worldwide and free discussion on and about
> everything, will only yield less positive results for too much energy
> wasted, if there is no steering person, an editor to keep the focus
> and act as a clearing agent. Any research operation needs to be
> meticulously structured.
>
> Another advantage of having an editor for all our inputs is that all
> of us non-English speaking individuals and groups would also be
> encouraged to contribute, if we know that there will be a relay unit
> which will, in a way or another, cleary convey our contribution to
> the rest of the design research community. Otherwise, as the
> situation is now, the design research community is denying itself
> some invaluable input from all those who throughout the
> world are not fluent enough in the English language."
>
> You responded (citing you by memory) with almost the same
> presentation as in your today's post, essentially saying that the
> main policy of the list is not to censure anybody.
>
> I, like most of the other participants, am of course for the
> democratic ideal. It however remains just an ideal. My deep
> conviction is that our human conduct towards any ideal needs often to
> be meticulously and intentionally monitored, if one aims at some
> positive, tangible and useful results.
>
> It has, again lately, proven obvious that some among us need time to
> time to be reminded by someone in a kind of authority, that we are
> not involved in an ordinary chart room, free for all, with all the
> trivia and out of context personal or general comments interesting
> only to few participants. I wish to view myself rather as a member in
> a working group, with a specific and very serious goal and task: to
> instruct each other in and about a professional field that still is
> in its enfancy. At certain occasions, I must confess, I too wished to
> be comforted that I was not in a wrong forum...!
>
> Kind regards.
>
>
> François-X. N.I. NSENGA
--
Prof. Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
Ryerson University Tel: 416/979-5000 x7749
350 Victoria St. Fax: 416/979-5265
Toronto, ON email: [log in to unmask]
M5B 2K3 Canada http://deed.ryerson.ca/~fil/
|
