In message 5.0.2.1.0.20010324190518.009f11c0@pop3.demon.nl, Jacqueline Thijsen jacqueline.lyst@jthijsen.demon.nl writes
At 15:49 24-3-01 +0000, Julia Jones wrote:
I'm one of the people who really, *really* likes the idea of compulsory roll calls on The Other List. In my case, it's *because* I'm a believer in the right to privacy. (Anyone seriously want to accuse me being a fluffy friendly bunnie-wunnie who wants a hugs and kisses list?)
Erm, no.
Funny, that <shark grin>. Oh, and in case anyone thinks I've come over all sweetness and light in the last few months (well, comparatively speaking) and that this is a wonderful thing, I should point out that Real Life is somewhat less pressing than it was last year, *and* I am about to be working from home with a DSL connection. I will have the time to carefully hand-craft flames, and I'm going to have to do something about not enabling automatic posting:-)
But as I pointed out on the other list before getting another roll call forced on me, there are other ways to preserve that privacy. There was even an introduction questionnaire made up for new joiners which most of us cheerfully filled in. Making such a questionnaire compulsory would give you an instant notification of who's new on the list and would also ensure that nobody you don't know about is listening in. This means only one compulsory posting that I could certainly live with, as opposed to several compulsory postings whenever some fluffy friendly bunnie-wunnie feels like asking for a roll call.
So exactly which problem do you think the roll call handles that isn't handled just as well by the above proposition? Other than keeping nasty old me away, that is...
Just to make it plain - I have no criticism of the way past or present listmistresses handle the roll call issue, I'm just talking about what I personally get out of the system.
My attitude to the roll call on FC is basically that I want a regular posting of the current subscription list. I'm happy to go along with the roll call potted biography thing, but my personal preference for handling my privacy concerns is that the subscription list be posted on a regular basis - but *not* posted on a rigorously regular basis as the FAQ is, as otherwise we'd have a lot of members who were subscribed for 29 days a month. And members who only subscribed for 1 day a month... Of course, things changed somewhat with the change in how subscribing/unsubscribing is handled - the original City list was moderated as far as *all* subscribing/unsubscribing went, even of people who were regular members but had just unsubscribed temporarily, and there was a regular roll call that amongst other things served to have a clear-out of dead subscriptions and those who refused point blank to let others know that they were listening. You didn't respond, you were unsubscribed. The admin load on the listmistress eventually made that level of moderation unfeasible, of course, and there was also a change in listbot that made it a lot easier to only have to give approval on the initial subscription. There's less of an admin need for regular roll calls now (I think, and Tiger is free to correct me on this without me biting her).
A questionnaire answered once on joining doesn't really address my concerns - it doesn't say who is on the list *now*, and past postings are of no use to the person who's joined relatively recently. I also don't actually care about the personal details bit - yes, it's often interesting and useful to have, and I think it does serve a useful purpose, but it isn't why *I* want a regular listing of who's out there on the City.
The other thing about a once-only questionnaire is that it's easy to fudge once. Maintaining a fake personality on a consistent and long-term basis is a lot harder. Since much of my concern revolves around people who are there under false pretences, even a regular, long-term posting of nothing more than an email address is less problematic to me than someone who posts once and is never heard from again.
In case I haven't made it clear - I have no problem with people using pseuds, so long as it isn't sock puppets or other *malicious* intent to deceive. Picking on one of the more obvious examples, I have no idea what Penny Dreadful's name is in Mundania, nor do I care. I know who Penny is in the context that matters to me.