MODERATOR'S NOTE: On October 14, following the vote, I announced cloture on the discussion of the moderatorship of the AmSci Forum. Sally Morris violated this cloture with her posting on liblicense moderatorship, and I violated its enforcement by allowing Sally's posting. Now I will make amends: Those who are dissatisfied with my 10-year moderatorship of this Forum are respectfully invited to leave the Forum and start one of their own. No more postings on the moderatorship will be approved. Dixit.
Stevan Harnad Moderator, American Scientist Open Access Forum On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Jones, Doug <jon...@u.library.arizona.edu> wrote: While I understand the sentiment to focus on the content rather than the process, it seems to me that what the recent interactions about Stevan's moderation suggest is a need to have some commonly understood guidelines about how the list will be managed. Sally's constructive suggestions are the most appropriate means (IMHO) to put this to issue to rest, rather than treating it as an annoying aberration that should dismissed and forgotten. The vote confirmed that the majority of those responding supported Steven remaining as moderator. It did not resolve the issue of how the list was to be moderated and what the role of the moderator should be. Doug Jones Science-Engineering Library University of Arizona Tucson, AZ -----Original Message----- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of Jeffery, KG (Keith) Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 9:32 AM To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Re: Liblicense-l: rules of the road All - As others have said let us get back to the purpose of this thread and stop fretting about how it is moderated; the vote has taken place, let us all get on with sharing experiences, views and proposals concerning the real challenges we face. Keith >---------------------------------------------------------- >Prof Keith G Jeffery E: keith.jeff...@stfc.ac.uk >Director Information Technology & International Strategy >Science and Technology Facilities Council >Rutherford Appleton Laboratory >Harwell Science and Innovation Campus >Didcot, OXON OX11 0QX UK >T: +44 1235 44 6103 F:+44 1235 44 5147 >President ERCIM & STFC Director: http://www.ercim.org/ >W3C Office at STFC-RAL http://www.w3.org/ >President euroCRIS http://www.eurocris.org/ >VLDB Trustee Emeritus: http://www.vldb.org/ >EDBT Board Member http://www.edbt.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ >The contents of this email are sent in confidence for the use of the intended recipient only. If you are not one of the intended recipients do not take action on it or show it to anyone else, but return this email to the sender and delete your copy of it >The CCLRC telecommunications systems may be monitored in accordance with the policy available from <http://dlitd.dl.ac.uk/policy/monitoring/monitoring%20statement.htm>. >----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------- Please note that from 20081006 all my email will be sent out from stfc in the format above. However, incoming email using other email addresses for me will work for the forseeable future. Nonetheless, you are advised to change any address book entries or typed 'to' email addresses to the new address provided above. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------- -----Original Message----- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of Leslie Carr Sent: 23 October 2008 17:08 To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Re: Liblicense-l: rules of the road On 23 Oct 2008, at 12:09, Sally Morris (Morris Associates) wrote: > Here's a set of 'rules' for another email discussion forum, one which > I personally think is moderated in an exemplary fashion I expect there are hundreds of other discussion forums whose charters and processes are indeed praiseworthy. To forestall a combinatorial explosion of admirable attributes, let me draw the attention of those who are interested to the following analysis of the diverse practices of mailing list moderation: Berge, Z.L. & Collins, M.P. (2000). Perceptions of e-moderators about their roles and functions in moderating electronic mailing lists. Distance Education: An International Journal, 21(1), 81-100. http://www.emoderators.com/moderators/modsur97.html Given the range of practices represented above and the result of the recent vote, I propose that the status quo is admirable position to maintain. (Moderation-wise, not OA-wise!) -- Les Carr -- Scanned by iCritical.