More on the new writers' group (part 3)

[zeborah]

Following on from part 2, so far we've got a pretty clear consensus that it should be:

• spec-fic focused;
• publically readable and easily joinable;
• a mailing list (which can be forwarded to a web forum and to nntp);
• "rushing in".

So let's rush in: Brooks, what would it take for you to set up a mailing list with web and nntp interface? What moderation possibilities would it allow, what issues do we need to know, and what questions do we need to decide?


Regarding the 'vision statement' (original here), would the following be better, worse, or the same?

2 a) We know that society in general and speculative-fiction in specific contain many stereotypes and biases that are racist, sexist, homophobic, ablist, and/or intolerant of people in non-nuclear family structures, people of different religions or of no religion, and others.
  b) We don't want to unwittingly perpetuate such stereotypes and biases in our own fiction. We also don't want to unwittingly perpetuate them in real life and/or hurt a fellow human being.
  c) Therefore we want other members to feel free and safe to point out to us if we've said something that accidentally perpetuates stereotypes or biases or is otherwise hurtful; and we will take it as a favour and learn from it if they do. [please see my latest post.]


My general plan for a timeline from now goes:

1. get the technology set up;
2. get the word out among people and groups that might be interested;
3. nominate moderators and decide on rules.

Comments

[pariyal.livejournal.com]

would the following be better, worse, or the same?

Better for me, because it would keep me from wondering with each and every post whether it was relevant enough. (I had a very useful conversation, relevant for this, with a gay friend the other day; will post about it when there's something substantial to post to)

[brownnicky.livejournal.com]

I am uncomfortable with the proselytizing nature of this.
I am interested in SF, writing and exploring ideas but I am not planning on addressing the issues mentioned in the vision statement in my fiction (or if I do I can't guarantee that I'll do it any way the Zeborah or indeed any one else would approve of.) Do you intend this to be a writing discussion group to replace rascf or is a forum for a campaigning group of writers who share the same broad political agenda?

[zeborah]

See my latest post.

[birdsedge.livejournal.com]

I think you're still hitting it over the head with a very large brick.

[birdsedge.livejournal.com]

That was re the wording of the vision statement. Sorry. Should not post before coffee has had time to reach my brain.

[zeborah]

See my latest post.

[nycshelly.livejournal.com]

A mailing list? As in we get it in our email and respond in email? Or would we be able to respond on the web forum where it's archived and that would then forward to the list for others to see?

Right now, I get email notices of replies to my LJ comments, but I then go to the journal to answer. I do everything else in the actual forums, ie rasfc and other message boards I'm on. If I would need to do this new group via email, I'll respectfully decline to join. I have more than enough email now.

[brooksmoses]

Would doing it via a newsreader rather than email work for you?

[nycshelly.livejournal.com]

I use an online newsreader, Bloglines, so if that can pick up the feed that should be fine. But I can't answer within Bloglines that I know of, so that might be a problem. I really don't want to use an offline reader, because I can't use that on any computer. There are few things I do with a computer these days offline, actually.

[zeborah]

I think Brooks meant a usenet newsreader rather than an rss newsreader.

The idea of the mailing list as I understand it is that people can choose to access it (read and post) either by email OR through a website OR through a (Usenet) newsreader.

[nycshelly.livejournal.com]

Aren't those offline, as in software you have to download? I've never used a usenet reader.

In the beginning, AOL had an interface for usenet, which was when I first encountered usenet. That went away when Google got into it. I used to get rasfc via Bloglines, but found it easier to go directly to Google Groups for it. I often am checking rasfc, for ex, when I'm at work (before the workday starts, lunchtime, a quiet hour on the reference desk) and can't put any software on those PCs. They're locked down to prevent that, which is why I started doing so much online.

[zeborah]

Generally, yes. (I find it convenient as it means I can download stuff in the morning and read it on my bus trip into work.) So you'd be using the web interface instead.

[nycshelly.livejournal.com]

As long as there's a web interface, I should be good. :)

I usually nap on my subway ride to work, and read an actual physical book on the way home. ;)

[aquaeri.livejournal.com]

Sorry, I'm just giggling at the idea that PCs are locked down against software additions, so of course all software moves onto the web.

(It makes perfect sense from an "of course that's what human beings would do" point of view, but I imagine there are a few software engineers quietly bashing their heads against their desks. I sometimes think people are vastly entertaining devices for breaking good intentions. Or as my boss when I was a programmer said "You make something idiot-proof, someone invents a better idiot", although I'd want to re-phrase the sentiment.)

[nycshelly.livejournal.com]

We've had a lot of problems on our work system. There are thousands of PCs on the network, for the public and for the staff. Any new software is pushed through the system. Any additions not on the list for a given PC needs to be approved at the highest level, and you better have a good reason for wanting it.

One problem was people downloading music overnight when the system was running maintenance, causing crashes. People, when found, have been suspended, even fired, for doing this. Two summers ago, our short-staffed, overworked IT department spent the better part of two months cleaning nearly all the PCs of a nasty virus someone apparently let in via an email attachment. No matter how often they send out warnings to not do that, people do it. So they control what they can. I'm waiting for them to start blocking specific sites, in which case, I might end up bringing my laptop to work.

I was happy when I finally convinced the powers that be that I needed Firefox on my office PC (still stuck with IE on the reference desks) so I can see how our website, which I maintain, looks on that as well as on IE. They pushed it through the system to my PC, though for other things, someone comes around with a disk and does it through the Admin login.

[heleninwales.livejournal.com]

At my previous job, I could access LJ and Google groups, also Facebook. At the college where I now work occasionally, anyone trying to access Facebook and Twitter are denied access. LJ sneaks in under the radar; there mustn't be enough college students trying to waste time on it.

It doesn't bother me, of course, because mostly I work from home on my own computer, but this problem could affect ex-rasfcians or potential members who want to access discussions from work in lunch breaks.

[nycshelly.livejournal.com]

I think Facebook and Twitter will remain accessible for us because they're encouraging library branches to use both as a means to communicate with patrons. We're getting ready to start a Facebook page for my branch.

[heleninwales.livejournal.com]

The college where I used to work had a Facebook page that they encouraged staff and students to join. I wasn't really aware of Twitter last autumn, but I don't think they had any plans for using Twitter.