Having now had the time to examine the new List setup (without yet having subscribed), I see a link to the List archives (1993-2006) at http://forums.archivists.org/read/?forum=archives .  I should have known that you guys in SAA wouldn't let an Archives List's archives disappear, LOL.

I'm still mulling over your request that we start labelling our postings to enable users to filter what they read.  While I understand that there are people who want to set rules to limit what they receive in their inboxes from a Listserv, I myself liked having a list where, as Jeff O'Brien once noted, we all sometimes gathered in different corners but stayed within the same large virtual conference hall.  (See
http://shrinkster.com/gfk )  I like the sense of one large, divergent and sometimes even a little unruly community.  Given what some observers criticize as an echo chamber effect of some other Internet communities, I would hate to see the A&A List become a series of walled off communities.  I find I've benefited greatly from reading about experiences of people whose work histories are very different from mine. 

I recognize that except for asking that we label our postings, the stated rules for posting on the new Archives List are not that different from what SAA has urged us to follow in the past.  However, I note that the labels you suggest relate mostly to format (questions, discussions, media postings, calls for paper) rather than substance (preservation issues, description issues, access to records, historical research).  Like anyone else who subscribes to the List, I'm not sure how your labels will work out in terms of people filtering what fellow subscribers post.

It's hard for me to explain why I'm struggling a little here.  For reasons I'd rather not get into, I have "issues" with overly conforming forums, where community standards seem to require that humor and OT type personal observations become ritualistic.  I myself like being exposed to a very broad range of humanizing aspects of handling archives and records.  In my experience, such exposure requires spontaneity and tolerance in List discussions.  I'm fascinated not only by processes and procedures but also by people and why and how they do what they do.  Maybe that's why I gravitated to working as an historian.  Of course, I recognize that not everyone is interested in what I'm interested in, not do they have to be.  I don't think your rules intend to squelch spontaneity, not at all.  It's just that reading them has started me thinking about the different things that people look for from discussion lists and how people such as I fit in.

At any rate, it's good to see your Archives has been preserved and remains accessible.

Maarja

A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List sponsored by the Society of American Archivists, www.archivists.org. For the terms of participation, please refer to http://www.archivists.org/listservs/arch_listserv_terms.asp.

To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to [log in to unmask] In body of message: SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname *or*: UNSUB ARCHIVES To post a message, send e-mail to [log in to unmask]

Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html

Problems? Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>