[spectre] not just an invitation to the hive un-launch

[armin at easynet.co.uk]

dear andreas

it is strange that you accuse me of 'insinuations". if you had read my
email carefully you would have maybe sensed that exactly that i did not
do. i wrote, it would be "astonishing" if such a thin as list
pre-censorship was the case. i find it astonishing already that other
people think that such a thing could be the case. shu lea assumed that
she was censored. ilze thougtht her email had not gone through for some
filtering reason. and by the time i wrote my email i had not yet seen
Ilze's mail go through, so I could not be quite sure. But I, personally,
actually never _really_ doubted that spectre was an unfiltered list. As
far as i know the policy of this list is that every posting from a human
person, a realy subscriber, which is not spam, does get through. And I
trust your professionalism as well as your list co-hosts that you would
announce a policy change if it happened.

i also know becaus i have moderated lists myself that messages get stuck
for those 4 main reasons that you explained in your previous email. i
was close to mentioning this in my posting, but then dropped it because
i felt i had written too much already. now that you had written that
email to lisa at blinkmedia.org i was even close to sending you a private
email suggesting you make that more clear to all subcribers, in a
message to all, and not just a posting to one person. maybe you should
still do that, it makes a difference.

so, i never believed that you,  andreas, or any other maintainers of the
list,  censored nor was i trying to insinuate that that was the case. i
think spectre is "open". may email was more philosophic about attention
economies on lists. as i wrote in my introduction i do value spectre as
a list where a lot gets announced. but i think think maybe the
discoursive suffers a bit sometimes. and in that announcement space
there are also maybe hidden hierarchies. at the same time i was
opportunistic. i wrote all that only to get attention for hive. and last
not least a discussion about the more narrow topic of list policies is
not what spectre needs now. in short: maybe vform time to time its good
to remind  subscribers of policies or maybe be more discoursive as
hosts

i hope you are getting me? chin chin wherever you are having your
prosecco dry
armin





On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 21:58 +0200, Andreas Broeckmann wrote:
> hey armin,
> 
> the insinuation in your message is difficult to understand. you know 
> me, you know inke, you have been following this list and its 
> predecessor for 11 years (which, as you know, have always been open 
> and unmoderated), and you (should) know how the mailman software and 
> spam filters work. - in any of this, do you find reason for this 
> 'speculation' of yours?
> 
> why do you prefer to mistrust those who maintain the list, rather 
> than consider alternative reasons? i can only speculate...
> 
> regards,
> 
> -a
> 
> 
> ps: like this message of yours, every message is posted automatically 
> that gets sent to the spectre list from an address that is subscribed 
> to the list.
> 
> messages only get trashed (again, automatically) if:
> - they come from an address that is not subscribed
> - they contain attachments
> - they use formating, marked up links, etc., which the spam filter 
> recognises as
> spam (see note below)
> - they have a volume of more than 40 K.
> 
> in these cases, the messages get deleted automatically. please, believe me that
> inke and i have much better things to do than 'control' what gets posted to the
> spectre list or not. our main work is to keep the channel as spam-free as
> possible, and to avoid the completely unnecessary pleasures of 4 MB attachments
> and multi-colour, multi-size fonts.
> 
> if your message does not appear on the list, try sending it as 'plain text' -
> you can select this option in the preferences/options of your e-mail software.
> 
> best regards,
> -a
> 
> read more at:
> http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/docs.html 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_spam_filtering
> 
> 
> 
> >now coming to the purpose of this email, there seems to be a hierarchy
> >also regarding the posting of announcements. A couple of days ago Ilze
> >Black sent an invitation of the Hive Networks UNlaunch to this list and
> >she thinks it got stuck in the moderation queue. maybe she is right and
> >moderators did not let it through. maybe the mail got stuck for some
> >other reason. whatever. but the mere suggestion that there are
> >weigthings or filtering mechanisms on announcements on a list whose main
> >reason to e today is to allow people send annoucements I find totally
> >astonishing. what are the criteria then for "good" announcements and
> >"bad" announcements? what, possibly, could the moderators not have liked
> >about the hive un-launch? I could only speculate on that and I dont want
> >to.
>