"In the beginning there was BEE-L, and it was good.  But lo, a desire
came upon the land to make that which was good better, either through
duplication or replication.  And thought there were many who were sore
afraid of such a proposal, it came to pass.  And time showed that those
who feared the split had sound reasons based on concerns of degrading
and flooding with chaff that which was good in the first place, and
alas, it has come to be!"
                         From the scriptures, according to St. Aaron ;)
 
> over time, *ten times* the current number of people who are presently
> on the list have subscribed then left.  I've watched them come and
> go.
>
> What *are* the numbers, Aaron?
>
 
Subscription numbers are only available back to 1993 when there were
321 subscribers on June 1; 396 on June 1, 1994; 621 in '95; 801 today.
This shows a consistent growth rate of about 75%.  Reviewing the list
of subscribers shows that a large number of original subscribers have
left, reasons for which would be mere speculation.  Fluctuation in the
numbers show a turn over, subscribers come, subscribers go.  And with
that turn over comes a repeat in the questions asked and learning curves
for new subscribers, both in beekeeping and nettiquite.
 
And here we go again with cries of "Let's split up BEE-L!"
 
Been there, done that.  For the whole picture send e-mail to:
                 [log in to unmask]
with two lines in the body of the mail which read
                 GET BEE-L LOG9401
                 GET BEE-L LOG9402
(You juno.com folks can forget it, the logs are too big, totaling over
11,000 lines.  An extract from those logs totals just over 1100 lines,
available on request to me personally, please spare the list).
 
In any event, the issue again at hand is, "Might it be a good idea to
split BEE-L?"  Suggestions include BESTOF, COMMERCIAL and HOBBY BEE-Ls,
and keep BEE-L (the original list devoted to bee biology).  I don't
know, the issue has been raised before with the main point being that a
list devoted to bee biology is all well and good, but doesn't address
the needs of the less lofty, more practical issues associated with
keeping bees.  Like it or not, the beekeepers have taken over BEE-L
the end result of which has been that the majority of those concerned
with issues relating to bee biology have gone elsewhere.  Thankfully
there are a few exceptions and I am grateful for their continued
presence on this forum, and I am thankful that there are seasoned
beekeepers whose talents and skills eclipse mine.  It is for the
research tips and seasoned advice that I wade through the babble.
I would not miss the volumes of questions which are more appropriately
asked and answered in an introductory beekeeping primer and would not
miss the mountains of requoted material simply to ask a one line
question which is also answered in an introductory beekeeping primer.
Unfortunately splitting BEE-L won't solve these problems and will only
add two, four or more places where I'll have to go to get the tidbits
of new information I glean here.
 
I think the crux of the problem is twofold, perhaps threefold, and has
already been hit upon by other contributors.  First and foremost is the
issue of self education.  The internet was designed to foster the
exchange of NEW ideas.  It was never intended to be a replacement for
libraries and cannot approach the value of a well written book.  I don't
want to offend or put off newbies, but review of logs show that there
are few new issues raised that have not been raised, discussed and
resolved in the past.  Suggested in the past has been to reach a
consensus on a few good references and to answer the perennial questions
with pointers to the sections in those references which contain more
information and better written answers than one will find here.
Perennial questions could be answered by "See page xxx in
_ABCs_and_XYZs_... or yyy in _The_Hive_and_the_Honey_Bee_", thereby
reserving BEE-L for discussion of NEW issues.
 
The second problem adding to the degredation of BEE-L is the excessive
requoting of previous posts.  My personal habit is, "If there's a carat
in column 1, don't read it!"   Following that rule I can quickly flip
through 5 screens requoting how lovely the weather is in Hawaii, to
discover that the poster agrees!  Don't get me wrong, the conversation
is nice and friendly and cordial, but it's not very enlightening to
those who come to this list for bee biology.  What to do about it?
Short of list moderation I don't see a solution, and I for one am not
volunteering for the role of list moderator.  I liked Allen's suggestion
of a list to receive the "wheat", leaving the chaff on BEE-L, but who
will assume editor duties and how do I know that what's chaff to the
editor is not wheat to me?  And I liked the suggestion of "friendly
reminders" to excessive quoters, but who will assume the role of net
police and who is to say that what's excessive to one is not crucial
to another?  Like it or not, to find that which is meaningful to ME, I
must trudge through it all, which is something I am willing to do
because in spite of the occasional skirmishes that break out between
Hawaii and New Zealand, and in spite of tirades to round up all mother
Earth mongers (I'm poking fun at myself here), and in spite of the loose
cannon mavericks out there, I have come to know BEE-L subscribers as
friends and comrades in my pursuit of keeping bees, no one excepted -
I never met a beekeeper I did not like, and there are times that this
list teaches me things I do not know.
 
Solutions to the problems facing BEE-L are quite elusive and will take
a good amount of effort and coordination to address and affect.  In
"learned" circles, BEE-L is like Rodney Dangerfield, "It don't get no
respect".  I was surprised that there was no mention of BEE-L in the
_Bee_Culture_ article on beekeeping resources in cyberspace.  As system
manager of BEE-L's host site I took this rather personally, but when I
discussed the snub with the editor I was told that BEE-L references were
edited out of the article due to the chatty and sometimes misinformative
nature of the discussion, and that more correct information is offered
at web sites.  The editor (who signed off BEE-L due to the high noise
to information ratio, as did his esteemed wife - a bee scientist) had a
valid point.  Issues are chatted and discussed and hopefully resolved
on BEE-L, but for a cut and dry, quick answer to a beekeeping question
one is better off going to a web page, IF THEY KNOW WHERE TO LOOK.
Which is why BEE-L is so popular and why there are perennial questions.
If you don't know where in cyberspace to go, ask BEE-L and you'll get
an answer!  You don't need no stinkin' search engine, you don't need no
special web browsers, all ya gots to do is be functionally illiterate
in the E-Mail package on whatever hardware platform you use and you're
in!  It's easy to take for granted what an exceptional software tool
LISTSERV is!
 
So stop rambling and give me a solution, damn it!  I said it before and
I'll say it again, splitting BEE-L will only serve to dilute a rich and
robust group and will do nothing to solve the afore mentioned problems.
Whether users are chatty here or elsewhere, splitting the list will only
spread out the sources one has to review to get the information they
want.  Do I post my question to BEE-L or sci.ag.bees or HOBBYB-L or
COMMB-L or perhaps invade BIRD-L or do I simply spam all the even
remotely related lists?  And do I look for answers in the archives of
any or all of the above lists?  Hell no, I can't figger out LISTSERV
searches, I'll just ask the question again.  But circumventing the
archives passes by a WEALTH(!) of information.  Perhaps the logs could
be edited to provide more concise answers to the perennial questions.
 
Seems to me the solution is in a robust server, which has the answers
prepackaged ready to deliver on request.  That can be LISTSERV if
someone does the work to encapsulate the answers (something I attempt
when my day job doesn't get in the way), it could be a web page if
someone has the skills and does the work, it could be Andy's Wild Bee
BBS (or is that Wild Andy's BBS <G>), or it could be any number of
solutions, provided someone will do the work and users can find it.
 
The more I ramble on here (forgive me subscribers, for I have sinned!)
the more I am convinced that there is no answer.  Users will go where
they are comfortable, some will be inspired to write, some will be
inspired to web, some are concise, others ramble.  The internet has
been likened to CB radio, only with a lot more typing.  Ultimately
users go to BEE-L because they LIKE IT!  It ain't broke, why fix it?
 
In closing (YEA!! I thought this would NEVER end!):
Please try to keep on topic, please become savvy with your mailer of
choice so that you can keep quoting to a minimum, read a good book in
the long winter nights, clean your room, brush your teeth after every
meal and have a fun and profitable beekeeping year in 1997!
 
Aaron Morris - thinking I've broken some sort of record here!