I, too, am one of the many who appreciates the contributions of
everybody--devoted staff, volunteers and otherwise--to our association.
Indeed, I have not been the least bit strident or personal (I actually
got gently kidded for blaming our outdated "system," rather than any
human being who inadvertently sends a reply-to-all message or the list's
manager). Indeed, I am starting to think we should retain the current
reply-to-all feature for its entertainment value alone. But since this
topic continues to fester and I seem to have become a principal
irritant/champion for change, let make a few points:
* upgrading listserv technology isn't complex. Google and Yahoo both
have group email/listserv features.I am on several lists so organized
that have over 1,000 subscribers. With those systems we wouldn't be
dependent on a non-ALSB institution's IT infrastructure, and we could
control the accessibility of our archives. Individual users could set
preferences so that they get every single reply-to-all personal message
instantly OR let them build up and be sent in a digest format that
gathers all such postings in a single daily message.
* A good number of us--three at least, which may amount to a
groundswell in terms of the typical ALSBTALK traffic levels--have
indicated they have no objection to or even LIKE getting personal
messages not intended for them. Those of us with other preferences have
never indicated we are deeply and grossly offended by the de minimis
intrusions. It's not that big an issue, we can all agree. But whatever
one's personal preferences about the reply-to default setting, let me
reiterate that this is still a separate issue from using listserv
technology that would allow each of us to know from simply scanning our
in box that it contains messages from ALSBTALK. To be clear, I am
advocating migration to a list technology that would make subject lines
look like this:
Subj: ALSBTALK: whatever the individual sender inputs
in the subject line
How could this be bad? It would help everybody manage his or her in
box, including those who don't want to miss a single reply-to-all
personal message as well as those engrossed in these monumental debates
about list management technology :-).
Cheers,
Walter Hutchens
Peter Bowal wrote:
>I am one of the many who really appreciates the consistent hard work of
>Dan Herron in maintaining the ALSB website and ALSBtalk list. Dan, you
>are doing a fantastic job. I hope you never retire; I can't imagine
>trying to find a replacement ExSec from the pool of lesser mortals.
>
>The ALSBtalk reply-button gives us all one good chance to make a fool of
>ourselves in public. Agreed, some people savor the opportunity several
>times. Having made my gaffe in 2002 (I remember the precise minute),
>I'm fine with the current settings - although one expects virtually
>everyone will eventually take a turn or two. Think of how it
>contributes to our humility and sensitivity for the mistakes of others.
>Perhaps the ALSBtalk reply-button is why so many others continue to lurk
>- possessed of a prurient fascination to behold the sucker who next
>falls into that trap. And how embarassing will it be? No scandalous
>betrayals or unfiltered "what I really think" public "oops" to titter
>about yet.
>
>May I raise a related point? I think the major technology and privacy
>concern of ALSBtalk is that all of our messages are organized and
>archived (by Miami University's listserve?) on the web. They are open
>and searchable by month/year and thread.
>
>While ALSBtalk is by subscription of members, and a clubby town hall of
>280 may be getting close to a notion of "public", one should still know
>that anyone in the world can read what we write on ALSBtalk through
>eternity.
>
>My own ALSBtalk postings are found on the links below, back to 1994.
>Google yourself to find your message trail.
>
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9405&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9407&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9408&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9409&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9410&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9501&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9505&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9506&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9509&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9510&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9511&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9512&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind9602&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9603&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9610&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9705&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9706&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9710&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9711&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind0207&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind0210&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind0211&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind0301&L=alsbtalk
>http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind0304&L=alsbtalk
>
>Dan, this might be ultra-efficient storage and backup systems operating,
>but I wonder if we should try to get the ALSBtalk archives deleted or at
>least accessible only to list subscribers (password protected).
>
>Cheers,
>Peter Bowal
>University of Calgary
>
>
|
