Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 06:06:02 -0600 Subject: List groundrules for Utah marxism space Here are some of the groundrules for the Utah marxism space I have been thinking about. All this is up for discussion, this is only my private brainstorming at the moment: (1) absolutely no divulging of private information, good or bad, about other list members. (2) no forwarding of private email to the list without the sender's consent (3) anonymity is ok; perhaps we should provide the possibility on every list to post under a pseudonym if the subscriber wants it. (4) One of the lists in marxism-space will be called marxism-ezines. It will have full-length articles from various marxist publications and web sites. (5) Since we have marxism-ezines, I will remove the 10 Kbyte limit from marxism-general if it comes. (6) I do think a list which is fully unmoderated for content needs a posting limit. But perhaps we can be flexible: contributions above the daily limit will need approval and will be sent to an editorial committee first. If any one of them approves it, it will go through. If we use smartlist instead of majordomo as the list server software, it catches duplicate submissions, therefore if more than one member of the editorial committee approves it, it will be sent to the list only once. Perhaps we can also play with the posting limit: try two posts per day and see how it goes, etc. (7) The lists in the cluster should be considered as a whole. Some of the more seasoned Mrxists on Thaxis should occasionally visit marxism-intro and field questions from newcomers. Those who are experts about some of the real-world developments which are in marxism-news should be the ones who approve the postings to marxism-news and feed postings into marxism-news; we should discourage cross-posting, etc. (8) Attacks which are clearly ad hominem without any theoretical or political content should be strongly discouraged. (9) The argument that people should be able to post freely because the recipients can always use the delete button does not convince me. A list is characterized not only by what is posted to the list but also by what is not posted to the list. How to create the institutions which allow these principles to be realized will be another thing to be discussed. Maybe we will have a closed watchdog list on which distinguished members of the various lists discuss with the moderators. For instance if one moderator allows a list member to slander others or to engage in personal attackes instead of political argument, then this may be brought up on the watchdog list. If one of the moderators engages in such practices himself or herself, then perhaps he or she can be recalled as a moderator. All these are difficult issues, and we still are on fairly new territory here, but if we succeed these lists will be very valuable. Hans.
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005