[Tango-L] Tango-L Digest, Vol 98, Issue 5

[dwyliu@gmail.com]

Hi All,

When I first started dancing tango, I devoured Tango L, going back quite a
ways.  I think it was and could be a wonderful resource and it would be a
shame if it went away.

I almost never post, basically because:
1.  I'm not really interested in arguing about "philosophy".  (What is
tango?  What music is authentic?  Etc.)
2.  There are practical concerns, but I doubt that people are interested in
my problems.  For example, I teach tango in Arizona, and I've spent a
(long) time updating my website before launching it, and am still working
on it.  (learntodancetango.com).  Please do email me if your interested in
providing input, but realistically I don't know if people want to talk
about video analytics.  How to provide the best online learning
experience.  How to market, etc.
3.  Frankly, the list has some really cool people, but also, sometimes it
was pretty full of animosity.

All of that said, it would be such a shame if it went away.  I'd be happy
to put together a forum of some sort (maybe something like
http://try.discourse.org/).

Frankly, however, where this list is hosted matters much less than having a
vibrant community of contributors ...

Best,
David

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 9:37 AM, <tango-l-request at mit.edu> wrote:

> Send Tango-L mailing list submissions to
>         tango-l at mit.edu
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/tango-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         tango-l-request at mit.edu
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         tango-l-owner at mit.edu
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Tango-L digest..."
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Tango-L Part 3: Why weren't people posting to Tango-L? And
>       Moderation (everyone's favourite subject!) (Shahrukh Merchant)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Shahrukh Merchant <shahrukh at shahrukhmerchant.com>
> To: tango-l at mit.edu
> Cc:
> Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 20:33:23 -0300
> Subject: [Tango-L] Tango-L Part 3: Why weren't people posting to Tango-L?
> And Moderation (everyone's favourite subject!)
> As promised yesterday, here is the answer to the survey questions:
>
> * SO WHY DON'T YOU POST TO TANGO-L YOURSELF?
>
> And it also includes my commentary on moderation (past, and future, should
> the list actually succeed in having a renaissance). First the statistics on
> the answers to the above question as to why people have stopped posting:
>
> 35% I was always a lurker
> 10% Don't think anyone is listening
> 10% Not much to say anymore
> 10% Someone may flame me
> 5% Use mobile device (not convenient for writing long emails)
> 2% Moderator may scold me
> 25% Other (broken down roughly as follows)
>         4% Annoyance or boredom with others' posts
>         4% Prefer other media
>         2% Difficulties with mechanics of posting
>         2% English not native language
>         2% Prefer in-person discussion
>         10% Other unspecific
>
> Most are self-explanatory but two points are worth commenting on:
>
> APATHY
>
> The largest single reason by far (1/3 of responses) is that of always
> having being a lurker (happy to be passive participants, posting rarely or
> never, instead being more a "consumer" of postings by others). And "Not
> much to say" and "No one is listening anyway" boil down to a form of apathy
> as well (though from the survey results, clearly people ARE listening and
> WANT more posts). So that's 45% or almost half of the responses that boil
> down to a form of apathy of some sort! That's certainly fine, and people
> have their own reasons for that, whether it comes from being timid, or
> feeling "unqualified," or busy or whatever. But that 45% is now close to
> 100% based on the lack of any postings, and it is not clear how or if that
> would change if the list were resurrected (but obviously it would need to).
>
> MODERATION
>
> The high percentage of people who seem to be have been intimidated into
> not posting from fear of being flamed or otherwise attacked is unfortunate
> (the highest reason after apathy-related ones), but confirms that lax
> moderation on the list, which happened at various points during its
> existence, that allowed the rude and inconsiderate to run rampant, was "bad
> policy" at best. More on this below ...
>
> From the significantly smaller percentage (3 persons altogether) who cited
> their dislike for the moderation as a significant factor--the comments they
> made are instructive (since there were just three such responses, I'll
> comment on all of them).
>
> 1. "The moderation was inconsistent to the extreme. Some very minor
> violations might get a rebuke, and at other times major violations were
> tolerated. If you're away, then get another moderator to help."
>
> Notwithstanding that "I'm willing to help in the moderation" would have
> been more constructive than "find another moderator" :-), this respondent
> was actually correct. The moderation I think was reasonably consistent at
> any given period in time, but changed from time to time, depending on the
> moderator's available time, experiments to unmoderate everyone and "see
> what happens" (wasn't a good idea--discussion degenerated rapidly),
> evolution in moderation philosophy as the list evolved, etc. And at one
> point there were three moderators, so while we tried to maintain a
> consistent general moderation philosophy, there'd be differences from
> person to person as well.
>
> 2. No written comment by the second such respondent, but he was the only
> one of the three to identify himself, and I didn't recognize the name at
> all. I'm guessing that it was the case of someone who made an innocent
> newbie error, got a form response that came across as curt, and decided not
> to post again. (Sorry!)
>
> 3. "Moderatorial abuse by Shahrukh Merchant," and later in the general
> comments by the same person, "The first step in reviving the Tango-L list
> should be the replacement of Shahrukh Merchant as administrator. His abuse
> of moderatorial powers to ban many members from posting is the primary
> reason for the moribund state of the list."
>
> This comes no doubt from someone still harbouring a grudge from a bruised
> ego (wow!! and after at least 5 years??). :-) Actually, no one was
> permanently banned from posting. The real abusers (flaming and ad hominem
> attacks were ultimately the only rules strictly enforced) were told that
> they had to send a statement that they had reread the rules and agreed to
> abide by them before they could post again, and this remained an open
> invitation. They were even invited to suggest changes to specific rules
> they had problems with (a few took up the first offer and could indeed post
> again, but none took up the second). The others just felt the rules
> shouldn't apply to THEM, and undoubtedly that same arrogance led them to
> the delusional belief that the survival of the list actually depended on
> their rantings, when the truth was just the opposite (as indeed supported
> by this survey, for those for whom that was not self-evident).
>
> The above comment is not to negate the validity of this person's opinion,
> such as it is. After all, the purpose of the survey is to get opinions, and
> I suppose it was (and apparently still is) sincerely felt. Rather, it's to
> state unequivocally, as a reassurance to the far larger numbers that have
> been reluctant to post for fear of being flamed or otherwise receiving
> belittling personal comments, that the ongoing policy would clearly be a
> continuation of one that can be summed as as follows:
>
> - "Take no prisoners" approach on flaming and ad hominem attacks.
> - Light moderation (which generally means that transgressions are ignored,
> or an email "reminder" sent if it's frequent enough) on all other rules
> "violations" (which would be ultimately be more guidelines than strict
> rules).
>
> That doesn't mean that a grossly inappropriate post can never get through
> (e.g., someone who doesn't have better things to do could subscribe under a
> fake name, post a couple of innocuous posts to get out of new-member
> moderation and then sneak in a parting blow). The point is more that it
> wouldn't be tolerated than that it could never happen.
>
> Another general comment from another survey respondent on point (coming
> from a reference to the TangoDJ list), "Don't know why the DJ list has
> petered out, but it was tightly moderated. The posts are almost always
> interesting, sometimes very technical. The rare flamage was always put down
> hard and fast by the moderator(s), and some people always complained about
> it." As a lurker on that list myself, it was clear to me that this
> moderation approach helped the list succeed as long as it did, though it
> seems to be suffering similar apathy blues now.
>
>
> For completeness, here are the remaining verbatim comments on this
> question (those not already quoted above):
> - Didn't understand how I could post myself.
> - It seems that most of the long time members are very opinionated and you
> are not going to change their minds about anything.
> - Came late to the party and just discovered its existence six months ago.
> - other social media more user friendly
> - Use Yahoo groups and Facebook
> - Most of my contributions were in response to someone else's thought
> provoking original post.
> - Plentiful tango discussion on Facebook.
> - I no longer keep my email page open all day.
> - Not much activity
> - English is not my first language, posting is harder than reading
> - I am not traveling back to BsAs as much anymore, and it seems like the
> the locals in NYC don't know or care about the difference between show
> tango and social (milguero) style.
> - A lot of the new questions etc are rehashing old ground.
> - uninteresting audience whose opinions will not weight too much
> - Others have more to say.......
> - Don't know how to post to Tango-L. I assume it's like most list-servs,
> but don't know. Would be good if a faq was sent monthly or quarterly
> - A lot of the information one may contribute is now available elsewhere.
> Also, I have found that an in-person discussion is valuable and one can see
> whether one is being understood, whereas on an international list, this is
> much more difficult. Lastly, it does kind of seem like everything has been
> hashed out.
> - I have in-person discussions
>
> Since this post is long enough already, we'll have more tomorrow with
> survey results on "Part 4: What Tango fora ARE people using now?"
>
> Shahrukh
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tango-L mailing list
> Tango-L at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/tango-l
>
>