>> Amy, Sharon, Linda, would you participate?
>I'm not so sure it would be useful to me, b/c the people likely to be
>giving me trouble wouldn't be the same kind giving others trouble -- the
>reasons and just about everything else would be different. But I WOULD
>appreciate it if someone would develop a better way of keeping unwanted
>people OFF my lists, without me having to resort to making them moderated
The trick to keeping them off your list is principally identifying them.
Policy is up to a list manager, yourself.
>Yes. I would be real, real cautious about it.
Absolutely positively. Caution is what my suggestion is all about,
and low profile is definitely the way to go. What I am suggesting
is that several list-managers who know each other get together to
share information by private e-mail. The last thing you want is
this information to be known to the net in general.
>I don't know. This makes me uncomfortable. First of all, anyone
>that is actively involved in the internet will eventually figure out
>the "hard-core" trouble makers. The net may be appear to be a big
>place, but in my experience, it really isn't.
I think I know what you mean, but I saw an article in the SJ murky
news this morning that listed the on-line services that provide over
four million individuals access to the Internet. Stephanie's directory
of lists is available to all of them. It isn't the ones that you
know that are the problem, its the ones you don't know.
>Keeping an "impartial record" seems too power-trippy to me as well as
Maybe it is power-trippy. So what? I just know that I was considering
opening some new lists and decided not to because I can't afford to have
any controversy associated with my company's name just now. I very rarely
post to USENET for the same reason.
The way that I would envision this working is as follows: List Manager
X sees some questionable postings from a given address. A note to the
source doesn't help. E-mail to data base, "what do you have on Cranston
Snord, foo @
com?" It turns out he was booted off of Y and Z's list.
Now X knows Y and knows she would not do any such thing capriciously,
but at least he knows now that there is a problem, which is 90% of the
way to solving it. What to do is up to X, as always.
I would also want such a data base to cross-reference aliases. That
way you could find out that Cranston is also known as Farley Flamer,
or that bar.com seems to have an awful lot of problem email coming
from it lately.
All of this is really no more than the Better Business Bureau does.
X, Y, and Z, when they have a problem, copy the offending posting and
send it in for future reference. Suppose Z has to finally call the
authorites to have a chat with the much-wronged Mr. Snord. They will
pay a lot more attention to Z if he has a history. True?
Well, it's not a perfect scheme, and now that I have written some of
it down it seems like a lot more work than I at first thought. But
worth it if the resulting data base becomes really useful. Anyway,
if as many as four list managers want to participate I would be
willing to start the data base, although I think I would want to
pass it to someone else later this year.
Please note: I will be out of the office starting now through the
end of the week to attend UniForum (come see our Fast Ethernet PCI
Adpater) in Dallas. I will only be able to respond to e-mail after next
Regards, and thanks for your comments,
Alan Deikman, ZNYX Corporation