As a dedicated lurker, I've been reluctant to add more grist to an already overproducing mill. Two brief observations: 1. There is nothing wrong with a set of explicit guidelines, though I'm not at all sure that is the main issue. The question remains how we as a community (a majority?) wish to enforce these guidelines. 2. I hope we won't turn a molehill into a mountain. A great deal of delete-worthy email has been found in responses to Mr. Brown's often annoying (in my extraordinarily humble opinion) posts. Those responses are rarely more enlightening. While Mr. Brown's emails can easily be discarded (filtered), the discussion surrounding them cannot. I propose that if some of the topics being raised are not of general interest for discussion on the list, we stop discussing them. I think the best short-term solution is to read selectively. I suspect we all have daily email far into the hundreds of messages. I for one am willing to spend the moment it takes to delete unwanted email, rather than risk the potential chilling effects of moderation. - Alex

Mary and others, the executive committee has been discussing this a lot lately, so don't feel your concerns have gone unnoticed. I think it's fair to say that if there is a consensus amongst list members that we need to create a new standard of guidelines and means of enforcing them, we are open to doing that. My preference has been to let the list speak first.