Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 07:39:45 -0500
From: Natalie Maynor maynor[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]RA.MSSTATE.EDU
Subject: Re: Archiving Question
In my rush to move from computer to shower to car to campus while ago,
I don't think I ever finished answering Danny's questions.
I'll make the end of the story of the history of the list brief: The
end of the story is that Bill and I decided that night at SAMLA that we
could try sort of a compromise -- that ADS-L could be an open list but
that we wouldn't announce its creation in all the usual places like
NEWLIST-L. As I mentioned earlier, it has been picked up by various
index-compilers through the years since then, but so far there haven't
been any problems. I think it's good to have some non-ADS members on
ADS-L, especially since some of them get interested enough to join ADS.
As for what Danny said about the availability of the list archives
right now, it's true that they're sitting there on the web for anybody
who wants to read them (all except the first year of the list's life,
for which we have no archives). They're also available via gopher and
anonymous ftp. Although I didn't read the announcement about the new
search tool carefully, I think our inclusion in the lists it covers would
bring attention some of you might not like. Because Words-L is gatewayed
to usenet, its discussions are included in DejaNews, the web search tool
for usenet articles. (There's a way an individual can create headers to
stay out of DejaNews, btw, although sometimes that person is quoted in
list replies of people who have not created the headers to stay out of it.)
A web cruiser hunting for the famous net porno sometimes stumbles upon
Words-L because somebody might use the word "fuck." The net cruiser
might decide to hang around the list or might send direct mail to the
poster of the "fuck" message -- regardless of how the word might have
been used (e.g., it might have been used in a discussion of male/female
differences in language use or whatever). We were once discussing on
Words-L the distribution of the terms "underpants" versus "panties."
I said something on that topic and ended up getting e-mail from a couple
of weirdos who found it via DejaNews, weirdos who wanted to discuss
underpants, not dialectal variation.
And this reply is also getting too long. I need to get ready for my
8:00 class. I think I've said enough to indicate why I personally
don't think ADS-L wants to be involved with the new archiving tool.
But what I personally think on this topic doesn't matter. My very
strong philosophy on "list ownership" is that the list owner takes
care of mechanical matters only and does not try to exert any kind
--Natalie (maynor[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]ra.msstate.edu)