There has been quite a bit of turmoil on BEE-L the past few weeks, which by
my recollection began around the time of "the suicide bee" postings.  What
started innocently enough, snowballed into quite a tumultuous avalanche that
rocked the list and support staff, offended some valued contributors, and
has shaken my personal resolve to provide and support this service.

Moderating an internet list is not an easy job.  It requires a lot of
dedication and giving of personal time, often when personal time is short
and hard to find.  Right now I should be extracting, but here I sit writing.
And moderating is often a thankless job.  Moderators are subject to constant
evaluation by subscribers, and often ridiculed for their decisions.  So be
it.

Objections can and sometimes are posted to the list.  A luxury of moderation
is that such ridicule can be filtered out from general distribution, but
rest assured such objections DO reach the moderators and all comments are
duly noted.  Let's examine the statement, "such ridicule can be filtered out
from general distribution", focusing on "filtered out".  Some will cry,
"Filtered out my ass, THAT'S CENSORSHIP!"  I won't split hairs, call it what
you will.  Inherent with moderation is the debate of moderation vs.
censorship.  It is often stated on BEE-L, "Read the archives!"  Well, read
the archives.  When I switched BEE-L to a moderated forum, Andy Nachbar may
have been the first to weigh in in the censorship camp.  After some time
passed, Andy was less vociferous with cries of censorship and admitted that
BEE-L was a better forum thanks to moderation.  Andy at times had some of
his submissions turned away.  Upon reflection he often agreed with the
decision.  Many have had submissions turned away.  Moderators have had their
submissions turned away.  I HAVE HAD SUBMISSIONS turned away.  Few like it
at the time.  Some tone down and resubmit their articles, which may or may
not be approved the second time.  Some leave.  Again, so be it.

Further focusing on objections about moderation leading to filtered
out/censored from the list, I offer the reason.  BEE-L is a list for
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology.  Discussions about
whether the list should or should not be moderated are not germane to the
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology.  Such discussions
do not add to the declared purpose of the list
"*  BEE-L is a moderated list for the discussion of research and
*  information concerning the biology of bees.  This includes honey
*  bees and other bees (and maybe even wasps).  We communicate about
*  sociobiology, behavior, ecology, adaptation/evolution,
*  genetics, taxonomy, physiology, pollination, and flower
*  nectar and pollen production of bees."
Objections about moderation will be filtered out.  Like it or not, BEE-L IS
A MODERATED LIST.  Criticisms of the manner in which BEE-L is run lead
discussion away from Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology and are rightfully
filtered to keep the bandwidth focused on the intent of this list.

THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF MODERATION, to keep the bandwidth focused on the
intent of this list.

There have been many discussions lately about what BEE-L should be.  Some
have opined that no one should ever say "Read the archives"; such a response
is not a friendly way to handle questions from newbies.  Some have opined
that BEE-L should be an open forum, allowing wide berth and philosophical
discussions about anything remotely related to beekeeping.  Such opinions
are fine, and welcome, and yes, even approved by the moderators.  But the
truth of the matter is that BEE-L, as are all LISTSERV lists, is owned by an
individual.  It is that list owner who declares the intent and sets the
rules for how the list runs.  Be assured that I give suggestions for
improvement due consideration.  And I am impacted, more so than I should be,
by criticisms and objections regarding how the list is run and the personal
choices I make regarding those I choose to help run it.  The bottom line is,
this list is owned by one person.  I try to make it as democratic as
possible, I try to have one size fit all, I try to have BEE-L be all things
for all participants, but the reality of the matter is that such a goal is
impossible.  And when conflicts require compromise, mine is the final say.
How I run this list and who I choose to help with the task are decisions I
made after lengthy consideration keeping in mind the desire to keep the
bandwidth focused on the intent of this list.

For those who may not know how moderation works, submissions to BEE-L are
first sent to every moderator.  Submissions remain "active" for 72 hours
during which any one of the moderators can approve a submission.  ONLY ONE
approving vote is required to distribute a posting to the general
membership.    Hence a clear majority of moderators can object to a post and
yet be over ruled by one vote.  It takes a unanimous withholding of
approving votes for a submission to expire.  Rarely do the moderators
discuss amongst themselves posts which are awaiting approval.  It is
considered foul play by the list owner for any moderator to approve their
own submission.

That is the mechanism in place to keep the bandwidth focused.  Recently,
keeping focused has been very challenging.  There are times in raucous
meetings when the chair has to resort to banging the gavel to restore order.
Such has been the case in the past week on BEE-L.  Posts have remained
unapproved to end discussions that were going or had gone astray.   It is
not always easy to decide when discussions have left the realm of informed
discussion.  At times, discussions that start out innocently enough ("Why
did the suicide bee fly into my lit smoker?") can degenerate into blatant
name calling and uproar that makes opening the next response a painful
exercise.  Sometimes threads go six or seven posts past the time when they
should have ended.  Hindsight is golden.  And some threads lose interest of
one or two or more moderators and get carried on through a single approving
vote from a single moderator long after the conversation should have died.
Again, hindsight is golden.  Knowing when a thread should stop is a hard
call.  It's a fine art knowing when to bang the gavel.  Too soon and
conversation is stifled, too late and the list is subjected to excessive
noise.  And inevitably when the gavel comes down, whoever was speaking when
the gavel bangs, whosever post expires in want of an approving vote is
offended.  Sorry, that's the way it works.  Please if you will, take the
time to review BEE-L guidelines at
http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm

I don't mean this to be a cold heartless assessment of the past week or so.
Believe me, I have lost sleep over this.  Regardless, that's how MY list
works.  Rather than behind the scene, off-list exchanges I offer that BEE-L
may be better served, and offended posters may be better served by keeping
focused on the intent of the list.  If the manner in which BEE-L runs is
objectionable, there are many other forums out there where chaotic exchange
is more the rule of order.  This is not meant as, "If you don't like it
leave!"  I value everyone's participation but realize I can't please all the
people all the time.  In the meantime I am convinced that BEE-L remains a
fine forum for civil exchanges where the bandwidth stays focused on the
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology.

Aaron Morris
BEE-L Owner/Editor/Moderator

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::