> The biggest problem I see with internet discussion lists is general
> statements made about commercial beekeeping made by hobby and arm
> chair beekeepers.

> Add to that, general statements made about discussions. Why not
> produce some real content, rather than to simple criticize other
> people?

The problem is that commercial beekeepers are unrepresented on open
lists, as are researchers.

There are good reasons.  Both are busy, careful about what information
they release, and sensitive to how it may be misunderstood or used
against them.

Often their statements may be technical and not be understood by the
those not educated in the context.

Both groups are careful about exposing themselves and their
organisations to criticism that -- deserved or not -- may have economic
or political impacts upon their activities and careers.  They have to
weigh the wisdom of releasing any particular piece of information as it
may be privileged, confidential or give competitive advantage to others,
and be discreet.

Often discretion means saying nothing, even in the face of outrageous
provocation and/or deliberate and malicious misrepresentation.

In one example I recall, at a time when bee research funding was drying
up and after a particularly egregious and misinformed barrage aimed in
the general direction of an ARS bee lab on an Internet list we all know
and love, the ARS reconsidered permitting employee participation in such
open lists and even interviews with writers for major bee magazines.
Coincidence?

Since then, we may receive personal messages off-list from researchers
who read our comments, or hear that a particular post was widely
circulated on closed lists or by fax, but never receive any direct list
participation any longer.

Leading up to the popularization of the Internet, lists like BEE-L  were
dominated by researchers, since they were the ones with access to what
was a scarce and elite new form of communication, run largely on the
surplus capacity of institutional computers and networks.

As the Internet grew in participation and influence we passed the point
where posts on a discussion group were of little consequence and only of
Interest to geeks, to where 'journalists' began to monitor and mine for
dirt.  At the same time, open list participation skewed increasingly
toward non-researchers and to less informed participants, including some
who seemed to clearly be malicious, deranged or mischievous in intent.
Moderation became necessary in many discussion venues.

Differences of opinion, misstatements, drunken or insane posts or
misunderstandings, deliberate misrepresentation and slander, and
conspiracy theories that previously led to minor local flame wars
confined to the list and of no interest to anyone except those involved
and other list members suddenly became potential brush fires that could
spread via the media and cause nation-wide reaction with huge implications.

So, these days, wise participants consider carefully the implications of
every word in every post, and organisations issue guidelines about
where, when and what their employees or members should post.

Most commercial beekeepers are quite aware that they are generally
misunderstood as a group and there are predatory organisations that
thrive by disseminating distorted and incomplete information out of
context and are very careful about revealing anything that could expose
themselves or their fellows to abuse.

Besides, many commercial beekeepers are/were rural or on the road, with
poor Internet until recently, and more inclined to being outside doing a
physical job and finding the desk time demanded by an increasing paper
burden over recent years a sufficient drag on their morale without
adding to the time at a keyboard.

Participation in any particular list is hardly representative of the
population at large, or the real world (if there is such a thing) generally.

Although lists can be a source of real information, they can equally be
a source of misinformation and should be regarded only as a form of
entertainment and time-wasting only slightly less screwy and unreal than
TV sitcom programming.

Of course BEE-L is different.

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html