[485] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
Lists--Comments
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Public-Access Computer Systems For)
Fri Jun 12 14:44:39 1992
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 13:38:18 CDT
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L%UHUPVM1.BITNET@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>
From: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <LIBPACS%UHUPVM1.BITNET@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list PACS-L <PACS-L%UHUPVM1.BITNET@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>
2 Messages, 107 Lines
*-----
From: jaffe@ucscm.UCSC.EDU (Lee Jaffe, McHenry Library, UC Santa Cruz,
408/459-3297)
Subject: Re: Lists--Comments
This discussion has gone way off the point. May I recap?
A subscriber created a useful and well-received guide, made it
available via FTP and announced this fact through postings to
10 (or more?) lists. Many of us received that message through
subscriptions to multiple lists. I saw no comment posted to
the list regarding this incident until the original poster
sent a message saying that he had received a number of comments,
including some from list-owners. He asked for more general
discussion of this issue and the ensuing comment has rapidly
drifted into apparently touchy and non-productive areas.
I think that it is important to remember that all of this
individual's actions - up to this point - stemmed from a
spirit of generosity that I greatly appreciate. I don't think
that there has been any comment criticizing the work being
offered.
However, it still may be the case that sending messages to a
large number of lists is discouraged. In Merit's guidelines to
mail ettiquete, they say not to cross-post messages to multiple
lists. The fact that the list-owners complained would be
another indication that this is not good form. Again, this is
not in any way to be seen as a criticism of the work being
announced. However, a number of people found the multiple
posting to be annoying and even labelled the announcement as
"junk mail." That started a response by the author and some
supporters who took offense at that judgement. Since then the
discussion seems to have boiled down to arguments about whether
or not it is too much trouble to delete unwanted messages.
I think that cross-posting, especially to the extent that it
happened in this case, is a mistake. Whatever arguments you wish
to make in response, you cannot get around the fact that such
activities are against the guidelines of the system administra-
tors and I think that is important to keep in mind. And when
list-owners ask you not to do that again, you should listen.
On the other hand, a mistake is just a mistake. No one is going
to drag you into the alley and shoot you. A little criticism
is not fatal, or at least it shouldn't be. No one should feel
in a life-threatening situation. The proper response to a
criticism is "thanks for sharing." example:
"You shouldn't have done that."
"Oh, sorry."
End of story. In this case, however, the whole thing got blown out
of proportion. The oddest moment in the affair was went the pro-
tagonist (cum victim) posted a summary of all the messages of
support he received. (It was odd, for one thing to see my own
note -- which could have been paraphrased "you blew it: now keep
moving" -- included. For another, this act violated yet another
email guideline: don't repost or quote incoming, private mail
without the permission of the author.)
To me, this incident, as minor and unimportant as it really was,
highlights how naive and new to this business we are as a group.
We act as if we can make up the rules as we go along and in fact
there is a substantial body of guidelines and ettiquete to which
we must answer if we want the use of the room. I don't think that
we should say "I can if I want to" and "To hell with the rules"
when someone tells us that we did something wrong. It wouldn't
hurt for more of us to look at these guidelines before spouting off.
Much of what I have quoted comes from:
A Cruise of the Internet: Merit Network's Guide to Navigating the Internet,
1.1.b , 1992.
[available via FTP from nic.merit.edu; dir/file
internet/resources/merit.cruise.sea]
and I've also looked at:
MAIL MANNERS
guidelines for using email
send mail to LISTSERV@bitnic.bitnet, message "get mail manners"
-- Lee Jaffe
p.s. Merit also considers it bad manners to criticise typos in messages.
*-----
From: jahb@Lehigh.EDU (JENNIFER A. HEISE)
Subject: Re: Lists--Comments
When our computer center "inadvertently" set my PACS-L to nomail, I started
reading it as a Usenet newsgroup. After dealing with the frustruations of
having all the messages deleted at some unspecified time (when I hadn't read
them) and trying to save msgs-- plus various time-wasters involving reading a
newsgroup AND my mail-- I went back to the mail option. I find Usenet good
only for lists which I only want to browse, not participate in.
Jennifer Heise
Reference Dept., Bitnet: jahb@lehigh
Fairchild-Martindale Libraries #8A Internet: jahb@ns.cc.lehigh.edu
Lehigh University Phone: (215)758-3072
Bethlehem, PA 18015
My opinions are my own. No one else would HAVE them anyway.
