(what's one more message (perhaps the final one) in a morass of, well, I
dunno ...)

Jeremy is right. The list is getting big. That doesn't necessarily mean
that it can't return to the community feel its had for the past 4 years
(I mean, the small town I'm from had more 700 people or whatever we're at
and kept its community feel, but it is clear that towns with 7,000,000 people
lose that somewhere along the line).

Many lists, when they reach a certain size, become moderated. For example,
I don't think bugtraq, which has some 40,000 members, could function if it
were not moderated. (Bugtrag, tho, also proves that a list with 40,000 people
can work, (tho the moderators use real list management tools and draw a
salary for their work ...))

Those of you who know me, though, know that I don't want to moderate the list.
But, I am going to float a couple issues via poll. They are --

* should the initiator (and all his aliases that exist and as they come
up) of msg 14484 (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/message/14484 ;
subject "Newbies make me want to vomit!") be banned from the list? (Since the
initiator didn't take too many pains to hide his identity, one may want
to consider this fact, and previous conduct (if any) of the initiator on the
list).

(Perhaps as an alternative, the initiator should disclose his identity and
apologise to the community?)

* should the list settings be changed to moderate a new subscriber's first
post? (This would have the effect of controlling a certain class of spam
(presently with low volume), and people who like to create hotmail accounts to
get around moderation, and probably the "vomit" post, but would also have the
possible effect of making the list feel even more members-only, and would
dramatically increase the workload of the volunteers, and could possibly
eliminate game-related actions, if the moderator makes a mistake)

I guess I could have made a decision on these issues without telling anyone,
and some (most) people may have preferred that. But, we've always tried to
talk about things around here. Its my way of trying to be a community
rather than just a list. Perhaps this is a dinosaur notion now, I dunno.

Note that the poll results will only serve as advice, not a mandate ...

Some other points --

* Blame the off-topic posts on me. The list charter (in the trailer of every
message: http://www.letterboxing.org/list.html), explicitly allows this.
Quoting in part: "The group is loose and easy going; related off-topic ok
within reason". I guess that's the way most people have always wanted it
and I figured people could handle it like, well, people in a face to face
setting. We've always figured that people's common sense could define
"within reason", which includes, btw, the right to opine (civilly) that
altoids, purple socks, geocaching, and benchmarking are off-topic and not
within reason, and the right to opine that they are. But like the old
quote about jazz, if I have to explain it, you won't get it anyway.
Sheesh ... the key word is "reasonable". I like to think of it as a
gathering at a park -- there ain't no moderator there, there is no reason
there needs to be one here ... but also keep in mind that no 5 year old
on the planet has developed the social skills necessary to undertand this
message, nor to understand RFC 1855, which "offically" defines the etiquette
of the list, so adult supervision may or may not be appropriate ... YMMV

* In response to a recent post about me "banning" someone (who shall remain
anonymous): First, they were moderated, not banned. Secondly, it was for
being uncivil, not for being blunt or the nature of the opinion. I don't
care to dumpster-dive the message in question, but you can if you want to.
This was also after one warning. At the time, 18 people sent me notes
agreeing with my decision, with one sending me a note disagreeing. The
point is not that I did the right thing, but that no matter what I did,
someone would disagree with my decision. That's the way it goes ... I
truly do try to me neutral in running the list, including doing things I
don't want to, such as banning non-member posts as we have recently (I
guess its a slippery slope ... and I'm sure some are disagreeing with
the way I'm handling this ... fortunately I am desensitized to it ...).

* Remember, we're all newbies. Some in Dartmoor cringe when they hear
the phrase "North American letterboxing" ...

* A recent poster had some excellent suggestions on avoiding flames.

* Ignore trolls. I'm the list manager, so I can't, but no one else has
any excuse to respond to a troll. Remember, trolls want you to respond.
Trolls can't survive being ignored, and it torments them after they post
and as they try to sleep if you ignore them ...

* And finally, a note on the first amendment ("freedom of speech"). It is
a misconception that the first amendment has much to do with people's rights
to post their opinions on this list. The first amendment protects
citizens of the US from having their speech censored by the _government_.
It gives you no protection from Yahoo!, the moderators of this list censoring
it, nor does it give you protection from others flaming you for your post
or asking you not to make similar posts. I've always wanted to write
this paragraph, so here I am ... just don't invoke the first amendment if
you say something controversial or rude, and get flamed or disagreed with ...

* Feel free to post your opinions about this on (or off) list, but be
sensitive to the people who feel it is not "related on-topic" ...

I don't have time for this ... and most of me would enjoy letting chaos
run its course ... but someone (again) suggested I do something ...

TIA
Randy
List Manager