[ale] as promised/threatened, an overly long post with probably nothing of real importance

[Michael B. Trausch]

On 05/03/2011 11:03 PM, Jim Kinney wrote:
> However, I exercised an option that is available to me as the list
> admin. I set the moderator bit on for all list members. This effectively
> gave me the power to censor the speech of ALE list participants. This
> censorship practice is something I am deeply disturbed by. I am
> extremely embarrassed that I let some irrelevant speech so affect my
> judgment that I would exercise censorship on a group whose founding
> process involves openness, freedom and responsibility.

First things first, I wish to applaud you.  There are, rarely (though
this is not often truly understood these days) times when some form of
major sanction is required in many communities.  I do not believe that I
have ever seen the entire list be moderated at once.  I think that it
was wholly appropriate in this instance, however.

It used to be a very common thing that people would wait before posting
and review their own words before sending.  When the Internet was still
a novelty, there was a great deal of concern for preventing flamefests
and a large amount written on the subject of being cordial and
integrating with the group well.  I'm sure we all remember those days,
and the rules that came with them.  Things like "lurk for a while",
"don't post angry", and so forth.

We're all guilty of violating those rules---there have been many quite
emotionally heightened discussions here that a large number of us,
myself included, have posted on.

I think that it is long since time that these off-topic discussions were
banned from the list.  If they do not occur, the need to bring the
entire list under control will be brought to a minimum.

> So I am in a crisis of conscience. I have been the ALE list maintainer
> for some time now and very happy knowing I have never done anything that
> I am opposed philosophically to in my service to the group. I am opposed
> to the use of the moderator flag especially for the purpose of silencing
> speech with a group whose central reason for existence depends on
> freedom of speech. And yet, I see no other recourse but to use it
> (albeit far more selectively than a global off switch). Thus my dilemma.

Again, I think that this was an appropriate action.  Completely.

As others have mentioned, this isn't an issue of free speech.  A person,
a group, cannot speak freely if there is too much yelling going on.  It
just does not happen.

I have come close to killfiling threads on this list, or members, but
I've not done so because most often things eventually pass, and life
goes on.  But we must pay careful attention to that which we spew.  All
technical concerns aside, we shouldn't make the job of the list
moderator/admin difficult.  We should have the ability to self-censor
and remain on-topic.  We are, after all, all (to my knowledge) adults.

> However, the aspect that concerns me the most is NO ONE COMPLAINED THAT
> I ALONE SHUT DOWN THE LIST. I made a unilateral decision and EVERYONE on
> this list just shrugged like sheep and went along. I got emails asking
> me to not bail out but if I was going to they would step up. But not a
> single email complaining that I took away their freedoms on this list. I
> expected 20-30 emails within minutes of the announcement of my action.
> That it never came has indicated this is no longer the ALE from my
> memories but it is something strange and far less satisfying.

I can't speak to others.  I've been pretty busy the past couple of days.
 My parents are in town for a visit.

I replied back to the "ALE list admin" thread that was started,
privately.  I hadn't yet made it through the killer thread (and truth be
told, still haven't; I don't care about that thread).  I am even now,
not caught up on reading ALE mail.  For that matter, I'm not even caught
up on reading my Inbox, and I try to keep that down to nothing.  So, my
silence on the issue is in part because I wasn't aware of it at the
time.  Even so, once I'd learned of it, I cannot disagree with it.  The
options which are available are few.

I think that any objections to your action, frankly, are unwarranted.
Either you pulled the switch and let the list simmer down, or let things
go on to produce a mass exodus.  I think we've had enough of those.

> I have announced my departure as admin effective immediately. My reason
> is because I find my behavior repugnant in my censorship of the group.
> As I waded through the "viagra porn site" spam in French (I'm not
> kidding) in the approval queue to find real ALE posts and send them on
> through, I did delete 2 posts that were a continuance of the political
> screeds and one was bordering on personal.

This is what you do.  And we appreciate it.  And if you're willing to
stay in charge of it, I for one am all for that.

> I have received 7 offers to take over the admin duties of the list. Of
> those 7, 1 has a history of involvement in political crap on the list
> and one brought up the political crap in their offer and tried to defend
> it. So the short list is down to 5. I did get several emails asking that
> I stay on as the admin with the argument that I have acted rationally.

I'm not sure why a history of involvement in political crap would affect
one's ability to manage a mailing list, so long as they could agree to
be fair and if a system of formal rules were agreed upon that they would
hold them up without bias.

I will +1 the argument that you acted perfectly acceptably.  I do not
doubt that you flipped the switch in a moment of strong emotion, but I
think nonetheless that it was the correct thing to do.

> So now what? Do I stay on, but knowing I will likely have to wield the
> big "STFU" stick which I abhor or do I pass the reigns? If I pass the
> reigns do I pick a successor or do I put together a vote thing?

It would be up to you.  I think, however, that if you wish to pass the
reigns, it might be a good idea to look into the possibility of a team
or two of volunteers.  One team would be a purely technical team and the
other team could be a group of people who would be willing to step in
and, if necessary, ultimately move to temporarily mute or moderate the
list for a period of time.  I do not see a reason for the technical team
and the "community" team, for lack of a better word, to be intertwined
in the same job -- unless there is nobody that is willing to simply do
one or the other.

> I will stay if asked. I will wield the STFU stick with impunity if the
> political crap starts getting loud again. I will step aside if that is
> the best choice for ALE. I will not ask anyone else to step aside or
> unsubscribe. I will ask those who continually poke politics to keep
> their noise below background. Those that refuse or are incapable of
> restraint, I will leave their STFU button set on until they improve.

I do not disagree with this.

I think we should all agree that the politics and the resulting mess
that comes from them belongs elsewhere.  If anyone feels the need to
really get it out of their system, sign up for an account on Eternal
September and join the comp.os.linux.advocacy group.  It has not been
about advocacy in years.  It's the longest flamefest on the Internet
that I am aware of that is even close to on a topic that is related to
this list, and many days it's not even that (related, that is).  But
it's a good place to go if you want to vent, scream, shout, and be
political.  It'll wear you out and/or make you cry pretty quickly.

	--- Mike