> > I debated whether this should be posted to the list due to concerns that
 > > all sorts of opinions, which may or may not be correct (and probably the
 > > latter)would come out of the woodwork.  Of course, the proper place to
get...
 >
 > Is this not the purpose of this list? To allow 'all sorts of
 > opinions' to be put forward, surely the very basis of discussion. We
 > have been told often enough that this is 'Informed discussion.....'
 > and therefore a 'discussion group'. If these 'opinions' are filtered
 > out then there is no discussion, only the views of the moderators
 > will be allowed, hardly the basic aims that we've been led to believe
 > in.

David is exactly right -- and the reason we have a number of moderators of
differing locations and backgrounds, and also the reason we tend to try to err
on the side of generosity.

The long and the short of it is that it has been proven over and over we cannot
guess in advance what lame or apparently misinformed post will lead to an
information breakthough, so we tend to approve everything that we can justify
passing on to the list.

Apparent heresy often leads quickly to a new orthodoxy, so we cannot merely turn
a deaf ear to outrageous sounding ideas.  This proven fact was the reason for my
pointing out the many huge posts originating from Arizona that we had been
sitting on pending an idea of what to do with them.  FWIW, those who went to
http://www.onelist.com/community/beekeeping and read them, and commented back to
me thanked us for not posting the articles to BEE-L, nonetheless I hope that
those with enquiring minds and a little time on their hands will read them, and
try to glean some useful conclusions from them.  They intrigue me and I cannot
quite believe there is nothing at all at the bottom of it.

Another example of how I can be wrong: a post that I personally felt unworthy
which turned out to be valuable was the original post about using bleach to kill
spores.  It made me wince, because my understanding was that spores were
impervious to such a weak agent.  I also tend to think that sterilization of
combs is a waste of time where I live and I don't find it necessary.
Nonetheless, the post =was= approved and led to some very interesting and
worthwhile responses, some from the other side of the world where the AFB
situation is very different.  More on this in a separate post.

On BEE-L, we have guidelines, but we try to use them with a lot of latitude and
understanding.  I hope all members will visit
http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/BEE-L/ and learn about the list, its history,
its purpose and its rules, all of which are hopefully very clearly spelled out
there.  I believe I have noticed a huge improvement in the quality of discussion
lately, as well as an increase the number and scope of contributors.   To me
this is a direct and positive outcome of moderation, as is a significant
increase in BEE-L membership to record levels (1014).

Something we will have to consider is that things will necessarily change as
BEE-L grows into a city from the small town it has historically been.  I
personally hope to see it grow to 25,000 members or more.

On a small list, all contributions can be accepted, but as a list grows, the
number of posts generally becomes overwhelming to most readers.  This is the
most obvious limit to list growth.

I think almost every wired beekeeper in the world would subscribe to a Bee List
that sent out =only one post every month=, and if that post were !absolutely
brilliant!.  If that same list were to then switch to one absolutely brilliant
post +a day+, I am certain that the membership would drop to half or less, and
if that same list were to send out half a dozen to a dozen posts of varying
quality almost every day, then the number would drop to about 1,000. Which is
about where we are at present with BEE-L.

The key to large high quality membership readership is high article quality and
low volume.  If we are to grow, there *must* be some means to limit volume, or
all those whose time is most valuable will tend to unsubscribe one after another
as the flow exceeds their ability to scan the posts.  This has happened in the
past and has the effect of lowering membership quality and restricting the
readers and contributors to those whose time is least valuable.  In any huge
group, some members must break off into smaller discussion groups suitable to
their level of involvement and understanding if all their needs are to be met,
but there must also be a central area where all the ideas surface to be shared
among all.

I see BEE-L as the central area, and the smaller discussion lists that are
cropping up as side areas.  (I'll try to list them on the BEE-L web page one of
these days).  I hope all internet bee people will read BEE-L, but that over time
the chatter will be restricted to smaller groups that report back to BEE-L
periodically.

When it comes to limiting volume, there are a number of measures that can be
used.  The first and most obvious are to eliminate unnecessary bulk, such as
redundant quotes and massive sigs and SPAM.  Moderation has saved the list from
multiple copies of toner and sex sites advertising (apologies to some of you who
need to buy toner :), SPAM and viruses sent in email, as well as some posts
misdirected by their authors or written in haste and repented at leisure.  It
has also blocked some posts consisting entirely of the quote of an entire
previous long article followed by 'That's what I think' or some such thing, and
also huge signatures outlining the entire life history, precise geographical
location and philosophy of the sender accompanied by some brief note or minor
comment, as well as a few that said "Gosh, I wanna get some bees.  What are they
anyhow and why do I want them?  Would all of you kindly slow down, back up and
serve me until I get up the energy to do something for myself".

Beyond that, some degree of selection eventually has to occur if we are to grow
and yet maintain quality, and this is the very real problem that David mentions
above.  The question of selection among posts is a tough one.  This present
discussion is the result of our having decided to hold back some posts and to
bring it to the attention of the list a whole.  The posts in question were
voluminous and badly formatted and of questionable truth, nonetheless many
(most?) of us are here to have our assumptions challenged; thus the dilemma.

Maybe we should have a separate list where we send everything that is rejected
by BEE-L for those who want it +all+?  It could be easily arranged.

allen
-----
See if your questions have been answered in over a decade of discussions.
BEE-L archives & more: http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/Bee-l.htm
Search sci.agriculture.beekeeping at http://www.deja.com/
or visit http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee to access both on the same page.