On April 6th this list turned eight years old.  Those who have been around
for a while know that I started this list as an alternative to unmoderated
forums, newsgroups, and mailing lists where on-topic discussion is often
not a priority.  The list has done well over the years.  Subscribership
has grown or remained stable, and over the years nearly 100,000 posts
have been distributed to nearly 8,000 subscribers totalling almost 200MB
of discussion.  I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone
who has contributed to our community.  It's because of all of you, and
not myself, that this list works.

Moderating any group, no matter what the size or topic, is an unusual
experience, to say the least.  Most of the effort I expend is off-line -
helping with subscriptions, reviewing submissions, getting posts formatted
correctly, dealing with server issues, handling the occasional disruption,
etc.  - and this has always by design.  This list is about classical music,
not about discussion forums or how the list is run or anything else, so I
have handled things as quietly as I could.  Likewise, being a moderator
puts one in a strange position as a participant.  If I post something it's
not Dave's opinion it's The Moderator Speaking.  I have no desire to unduly
influence the group that way, so I try and be circumspect and let the
discussions go where they may, though I don't always succeed.  In addition,
I've also been so busy these last few years that I simply don't have the
time I might like to have to participate as a listmember, so I haven't been
as active as when the list started.

This situation has obviously caused some misconceptions to arise that
I would like to address.  The most basic thing I would like to emphasize
is that whether I agree with a post or not has absolutely nothing to do
with whether it will get posted.  In 99.9% of the cases, if your post
is about classical music, and it doesn't engage in ad hominim attacks or
other gross incivility, it will be posted.  I have been less tolerant of
improperly formatted posts in recent months, but this has been a minor
thing.  In fact, I think it's so important for opinions to get out there
in some cases I'll spell-check and reformat a post that otherwise I should
reject.  I don't do this because I agree with the post.  I have actually
done this many times with posts I disagree with completely.  I do this
because I think it's important to the health of the discussion.

This idea, that the atmosphere and structure of a community like this
*must* be conducive to dissent and disagreement as much as it nurtures
agreement and accord, is fundamental to my philosophy.  A community will
simply disintegrate otherwise.  I've been engaged in on-line discussion
since 1987, and I've seen it happen over and over again.  The bottom
line is that no one should see the appearance of an idea on the list as
something I have validated.  In truth, I probably disagree - mildly, but
sometimes strongly - with 80-90% of the posts to the list.  This is a
*good thing* in my book.  Ideas should be aired, and smacked around as
appropriate.  We all learn from this.

There's also been a strange idea circulating that I banish people from
the list for arbitrary or personal reasons.  From the beginning, I've
been aware of this danger, and I've fought it as hard as I possibly can.
In fact, less than a dozen people have been shown the door over the years.
In each case, the decision to deny a subscription has been based on bad
behavior, and not opinions.  One thing that is simply intolerable on this
list - and in any public forum - is dishonesty.  Trying to subscribe under
a false name, using the subscriber list to circumvent list moderation, and
other childish behavior receives zero tolerance from me.  Though I believe
such behavior shows me great disrespect, it's the disrespect shown to the
list community I'm most concerned about.  Dishonesty and the resulting lack
of respect eats away the foundation of a community.  In a couple of cases
people have been removed from the list for behavior off the list.  In these
cases, I use legality and ethics as barometers of acceptability.  I don't
care how civil a person's posts to the list are, if that person is using
the list to make private contacts for the purpose of obscenity or
harassment (which is illegal in the U.S.), that's always unacceptable.
If I didn't take action in these cases, I could potentially be considered
to have criminal or civil liability.  But beyond that I feel a primary
responsibility to the list and its members.

The analogy I've always used for a healthy list is a symposium.  A place
where people meet to discuss a certain topic within an agree-to structure
and according to known rules of conduct.  Without basic rules of order the
symposium would quickly degenerate into a mob.  Everyone gets to have their
say on the list, but it doesn't mean that everyone gets unlimited podium
time.

The last thing I'd like to address is the issue of content.  From day
one I've been criticized again and again for the content of the list.
Either the discussion is too technical or not technical enough.  We
discuss recordings too much.  There's too much dissent or there's not
enough.  The posts are too long, and so forth.  I have to say that anyone
who criticizes a list for its content is an absolute fool.  If the list
doesn't have what you want, leave and find a group that meets your needs or
establish your own.  If you are too lazy to contribute to the discussion in
such a way as to bring it around to something you find interesting, then
do everyone a favor and move on to something that does interest you.  This
list - any list - is built from the contributions of its members.  Because
the discussion is yours, it's not a product or commodity you can complain
about.  If we primarily discuss recordings (as every single public forum on
classical music does) it because recordings are our only common experience.
We are a geographically and demographically diverse group, and so finding
common ground for conversation is difficult.  I love reading about a
concert at the Concertgebouw or a performance by one of our listmembers,
but except in rare cases these experiences are not available to me, or to
most of us.  If you don't want to read about recordings, there are places
where such discussions are strongly discouraged.  But to join a group and
then complain that what people write in that group isn't interesting is the
height of childish self-involvement.

You'll have to take my word for much of this, and as well as for
the fact that I don't see moderating this list as a self-empowering or
self-aggrandizing activity.  If anything I'm more limited in my expression
than I would be as a regular listmember and because of moderation
activities I often have far less time to participate than I would like.
In the past, I have not encouraged discussion of the list on the list
because I think it is both off-topic and uninteresting, but if you have
some concern in this area, let's get it out now.  We'll discuss it here
for the first and last time, so vent if you have something you need to
get off your chest.  I will respond honestly - perhaps too honestly -
to any concern you have.

Dave
[log in to unmask]
http://www.classical.net/