[Tango-L] How the Tango-L List is Moderated
Shahrukh Merchant
shahrukh at shahrukhmerchant.com
Wed Feb 6 14:03:57 EST 2008
Since the subject comes up once in a while, and some people have some
misconceptions about how it works (or just plain curiousity), here is
the gist of it.
In general, it is greatly to the advantage of the moderators NOT to have
anyone on moderation status, as it just creates more work for them.
There are basically two ways people get on moderated status.
a. When anyone first subscribes to the list, he is automatically on
moderated status. This is mostly to prevent spammers from subscribing
and then sending spam, and was implemented recently on Tango-L. It has
the side benefit of catching most newbie errors as well (e.g.,
unnecessarily attaching the entire content of the previous email). After
a few postings (sometimes as few as one), the person is removed from
moderated status.
b. Someone is put on moderated status by the moderator for intentional
and/or severe and/or repeated list abuse or rules violations, or for a
statement of intent to do so.
c. There is actually a third category, which I use once in a while, sort
of a blend of (a) and (b), which is to get the attention of someone who
has some relatively minor violation (e.g., unnecessarily attaching the
entire previous email), but who seems to ignore the repeated emails I
send to them pointing this out. It generally gets their attention when
they HAVE to read and act on the reminder email in order for their posts
to get through. This is really more like putting someone back in
category (a), since they are newbie type errors, rather than intentional
or severe rules violations.
Hence, most of the rest of the discussion will focus on category (b):
"Intentional and/or severe and/or repeated list abuse or rules
violations, or for a statement of intent to do so." (As usual in such
cases, it is 1% of the posts or posters that end up needing 90% of the
maintenance effort.)
To put things into context, let me mention three points:
i. There are, at this point in time, more people in category (b) than
there have every been in the history of Tango-L, and this number is a
large whopping THREE (3). I.e., it's an insignificant problem as far as
I'm concerned in terms of list membership but a significant nuisance in
terms of my time, because it's 0.3% of the list membership demanding
significantly more than their share of the moderators' time.
ii. Since I started enforcing the rules, particular the "no flames"
rules, the exodus of about 10 people per month leaving because they are
sick of the bickering and rudeness has been stemmed (and they are
generally the civilized people one would LIKE to keep in such a group).
iii. I am not prepared to devote more than 1 month of my lifetime to
attending to list-member requests (particular those that come out of
intentional rules violations), which if you take the simplistic view
that 1000 people will request some kind of assistance at 15 minutes
each, well that's thirty-one 8-hour days right there. (I can't imagine
being on my deathbed, saying, "My only regret in life is not having
spent more time administering Tango-L ....") And I am much more willing
to push that number for people having genuine technical or other such
problems with their postings, than people who arrogantly demand my time
because they feel that they are above the rules.
So, with these preliminaries out of the way, here is the approximate
algorithm for enforcement of the Tango-L rules.
1. If someone is in category (a) (temporary or default moderation) and
the posting is fine, I let it through and generally clear the moderation
flag after a small number of good postings. If there is a problem, even
a small one, I point it out along with a summary of the rule in question
and a link to the rules page, and invite the poster to correct and resubmit.
2. Every so often, I scan the Tango-L postings and send reminders to
those who have violated the rules. Most common are "unnecessary quoting
of entire previous email," "unrelated to tango" and "1-liner trivial
posting" (which for some bizarre reason seems usually to be accompanied
by "unnecessary quoting of entire previous email"). NONE of these
results in someone being put on moderation--it is just an attempt to
improve the quality of the postings a little. The usual response I get
to these is (a) none (which is fine--it's a reminder) (b) an "OK, thanks
for the reminder" or (c) some kind of justification ("I'm a Buddhist
haiku poet and MY 1-liner was replete with meaning, but fine, if you say
so ...").
3. If it's a flame I see on Tango-L, then it depends on the nature of
the flame and and posting history of the poster. Recall that it has been
stated strongly in the rules and in postings by me to the list that
flames are the most strongly enforced rules and that my limited time
does not allow me to be subtle in my response to them (i.e., expect a
sledgehammer approach). Even so, if it's a mild flame, "OK, who died and
made you Tango God?" or "Is your tango as bad as your postings?" from
someone who has stepped out of line the first time, but is generally a
good contributor, he or she gets a warning. Anonymous or possibly
anonymous posters get treated more strictly in this regard as they are,
intentionally or otherwise, hiding behind their anonymity. If it's a
full-scale rant against someone, or a repeat offence, they get put on
moderation immediately. I.e., they get put in Category (b) above: "for
intentional and/or severe and/or repeated list abuse or rules
violations, or for a statement of intent to do so."
4. If someone is in category (b), it is because he either (i) posted a
vicious flame (or a repeated one) or (ii) have declared that they don't
consider the Tango-L rules valid (or applicable to them) and don't
intend to follow them (i.e., a future flame-thrower or nuisance).
In all these cases, he would get an email that says that before posting
any more to Tango-L, he would need to do all the following steps:
- Read or reread the Tango-L rules;
- Send an email stating that they have done so, and intend to follow the
rules henceforth;
- Actually follow the rules henceforth.
Most people who just stepped out of line "in a moment of passion" do so,
and get taken off moderation (not necessarily immediately depending on
their history of violations), but their legitimate posts get through
meanwhile.
Those who refuse to send the mail (saying they agree to abide by the
Tango-L rules), or send a mail stating that they don't intend to, or are
above them, or consider them illegitimate, or consider such a request
patronizing, or that their pride is hurt or whatever, don't get any more
mail from me, nor do their postings get through anymore. It was stated
quite unambiguously what they need to do to get off moderation, and this
is nothing more than what all list members have agreed to implicitly by
joining the list, except they have been asked to state it explicitly
since they have violated the implicit trust. That offer remains open
more or less indefinitely, but since they have by then used up their
lifetime supply of "15 minutes of moderator's time that he's willing to
spend with problem or arrogant members," they don't receive any more
communication from me, but they know what they need to do (send the mail
or unsubscribe).
What about "MY RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH?" (visualize trumpets, halos,
Statues of Liberty ...) It is rather puzzling that someone would
interpret this as applying to Tango-L ("A victim of an incompetent high
school civics teacher," chuckles an attorney friend, but more likely
just an attempt to appeal falsely to a higher ideal to justify boorish
behaviour.) When I see that kind of response as an excuse for violating
the Tango-L list rules, I instantly translate it to, "I want to post
what I want, without regard for the rules," sort of like wanting to
spray-paint graffiti on someone else's building ("It's free speech,
isn't it?"). Answer: You'll have to find a different place to do so.
As the creator of the list, I fully realize that the list is the sum
total of the contributions by its members. And that some leeway in
interpretation and enforcement of rules is warranted and beneficial in
instilling a welcoming ambience and one open to discourse. But anyone
who thinks that it is a forum for them to say what they want and behave
as they will without regard to the list participation rules is doomed to
frustration on most Internet mailing lists or discussion groups, and
certainly on Tango-L.
A far better model for Tango-L (than a soapbox to demonstrate ones
"Freedom of Graffiti") is perhaps a party--let's say a Milonga, for even
easier identification. No admission charge for the Milonga. You can even
leave your flyers at the designated flyer table (Tango-A). As with any
party, there are rules of behaviour that are expected. The host takes a
light touch with enforcing them since he wants to be welcoming, and
besides he wants to dance a few tandas too and doesn't want to spend the
whole time watching (or having to watch) to see how people are behaving.
Besides, he wants a lot of people to come to the Milonga (any party is,
after all, the sum of the presence of the guests, with the host just
enabling it and perhaps setting the ambience to some extent), even those
who dance different style of Tango than he does. He doesn't want it to
be like one of those uptight Milongas he's heard about where everyone
gives you dirty looks if you do anything that hasn't been done for at
least 20 years in Buenos Aires. But of course it has to be done
respecting other people at the Milonga, the venue, etc.
But every so often someone comes in and insists on dancing against line
of dance, colliding into people, reserving tables for 16 people even
though they never show up just so he can spread out, tracking mud into
the dancehall, ... The host knows that this diminishes the enjoyment of
others, and that the regulars are going to stop coming if this
antisocial behaviour continues, and certainly are enjoying themselves
less as a result, and that people are looking to him to control it. It
takes away time from his own dancing, sipping champagne and socializing,
but he knows that he needs to do it to keep the Milonga from spiralling
downwards into a place that only the boors come to, because only they
can put up with each other. So he reminds the errant guests of their
obligations, and most apologize and accept (they had just got carried
away with the energy of the Milonga, as it turned out). But one or two
refuse, claiming that, "No one owns Tango and it belongs to the world
and hence I can dance the way I want. And no one owns my soul and hence
I can behave the way I want."
They proceed to start insulting people and acting like they owns the
place, forgetting that they are really guests. They spit at people and
pinch the women's (and men's) bottoms and laugh when they shriek. And
even if they don't, they insist that they have the right to do so, and
that they will whenever they feel like it. So the organizer tells the
person at the desk not to let them in until they have agreed to observe
all the rules of the Milonga and of acceptable social behaviour. One
chooses to do so, the other stops coming ... no one misses him and after
a while people start to comment on how the Milonga has become more
pleasant recently ... One or two say, "Well, actually I do kind of miss
him in some ways, obviously not for his behaviour, but some of his jokes
were funny, but true, we'd have lost 50 other regulars if he'd continued
the way he did." Perhaps the one who doesn't come back will start his
own Milonga (he can even put out his flyer on the table if he does).
Perhaps it will wither away or perhaps it will be successful and cater
to a different, more "in you face," crowd. Perhaps the original Milonga
will wither away and the new one will become the dominant one (the
"boor" turned out to be a "visionary"--who'd have guessed?!). Who knows?
Diversity and Darwinism will ultimately prevail.
Returning to the Tango-L world ... So what happens if someone doesn't
agree with the list rules? Well, they have a right to leave the list; in
fact they have an obligation to do so. As stated in the list rules, "Any
members subscribing to this list agrees to unsubscribe immediately if
they do not agree with all the usage rules stated here, and agree to
seek help in unsubscribing if they cannot do so themselves by sending an
email to tango-L-owner at mit.edu requesting such assistance." They are
also free to send an email proposing changes in the rules to
tango-L-owner at mit.edu, but the rules have served the list well for 10
years now (an eternity in Internet time) and while some fine-tuning
still gets done to cover the occasional new situation that comes up,
whole-scale changes are unlikely.
Shahrukh
tango-L-owner at mit.edu
Tango-L and Tango-A home page: http://www.tango-L.com/
Tango-L rules: http://www.tango-L.com/tango-L-rules.htm
P.S. This email is not written for the benefit of the errant few (it is
usually a waste of energy to do so)--it is written for the benefit of
the majority of the list members, so they understand the process I go
through in moderating the list. I would hardly claim it's a perfect
process by any means, but it's the one we have. There was a time when
there were three moderators and an "appeals" process for those whose
posts were rejected by one moderator. There was perhaps ONE posting
where this process resulted in a reconsideration, but this fell apart,
mostly because most of the time was spent on clearly inappropriate posts
that didn't merit the time spent on reconsidering them, given the
limited time availability of the moderators.
More information about the Tango-L
mailing list