on the recent change ...
Hi all, Let me begin by thanking everyone for your comments, arguments, suggestions for additional research, possible resolutions, etc. in response to the recent - premature - change in the default setting on the air listserv. After considerable discussion and debate, the Executive Committee has decided on the following course of action: In part because it appears that list discussion is continuing (indeed, thriving), we'll keep the recent change - but only on a _temporary_ basis, pending further exploration, debate, and resolution as approved by the membership. We will continue our original discussion and further exploration of the multiple issues involved, including (a) legal issues and (b) the possibility of moving the air-list archive in a way that Alex Halavais has suggested might resolve the major concerns that motivated our discussion and exploration of making such a change in the first place. In order to explore these issues in such a way as to maximize input and participation from the larger listserv membership, we are establishing a working group - charged with responsibility to * examine the various issues and concerns involved, including those expressed in the recent email exchanges following the change; * soliciting further opinions and relevant research from the membership; and * developing recommendations for our best options, including the possible mechanisms for a vote/referendum on this matter by the listserv membership. We anticipate that the working group should be able to complete their work and present their recommendations to the Executive Committee and the membership within the next two months. If you are interested in serving on this working group, please email me privately. Again, many thanks for the lively and thoughtful discussion, diverse suggestions, etc. - as well as for your understanding that this change was made prematurely, i.e., prior to precisely the sort of complete and fully dialogical process that we all agree is the ideal and proper approach for AoIR. Looking forward to hearing from volunteers! cheers, - charles ess President, Association of Internet Researchers
Gotta say that I've yet to see anything that lends merit to the necessity of this change. I can see the argument that some people are unhappy with the amount of email they receive from the list, but should that impinge upon the people who don't have a problem with it... I am pretty sure that email management is not a community problem, but a personal problem. I think we need to know why this change was a good or legitimate choice for the organization. It was a premature change, made without consultation to the membership, with apparently no strong justification. A working group is fine, but why should the working group operate under different settings from air-l currently, but i bet... it will have the correct/normal reply settings on its lists if it chooses to use one. It just seems to me that... there isn't anything keeping this setting from being normal. There seems to be a good amount of support for it being normal. Perhaps there is a huge mass of people communicating with the exec that this is a good thing, but I've not seen that, and it seems like that should be made in the public forum to me. That is sort of what AoIR centers on, this public forum, we used to have other forums, but this is sort of the last big one. Jeremy Hunsinger Political Science Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Information Ethics Fellow Center for Information Policy Research () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\ - against microsoft attachments http://wiki.tmttlt.com http://www.tmttlt.com You cannot depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus. --Mark Twain
Jeremy is asking for a justification for the change. I think that Charles has already explained it... but to me the problem is quite simple. With "reply to list" as default we currently have no way of ensuring that a mistake does not end up in Google two days later. Until we figure out if it is the right solution (or find another solution) perhaps a slight readjustment of having to press another button in your mail program could be worth sparing those people their embarrassment? Also bear in mind the problem is not new, it has been discussed previously on the list. See this thread for example from 2006 http://listserv.aoir.org/htdig.cgi/air-l-aoir.org/2006-December/011917.html --- Asa Rosenberg Department of Sociology, University of Gothenburg
participants (3)
-
Charles Ess -
jeremy hunsinger -
Åsa Rosenberg