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

of "control."

--Natalie (maynor[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]