Re: Syndicate: bureau automation

[Julie <bluedahlias@mindspring.com>]

Dear All:

In general, I agree with Frederic, filtering doesn't really deal with the
issue. As Frederic wrote "I truly feel that an ml should rule itself, or
die."

Julie Blankenship


At 3:12 PM +0200 8/17/01, Frederic Madre wrote:
>greets!
>
>I jump into the debate of automatic filtering and/or administration
>because this is a subject that I gave a long thought about right after I
>ultimately closed the palais-tokyo list.
>
>At the time, I thought that it would be so nice to have the system being
>able to do chores like limiting the number of posts by list member or,
>exactly like nn described, having the possibility to choose multiple
>criteria channels from a huge unthreaded mess of list mail. This is why I
>had already begun to use whatever possibility there was with the mailman
>admin interface to achieve what could be achieved w/o programming:
>limiting the size of a single post, forbidding posts that had more than 2
>recipients (to refrain x-posting), disallowing posts from non-members
>while authorising spam machines, etc
>
>It did not work. I mean, it did not achieve what I wanted which prompted
>me to ask myself better what I wanted.
>
>So I came up with even more refined ideas for automatic administrative
>processing. I visioned a web page with the list of members and columns of
>properties and one could choose its preferred language, max number of
>posts per day (to you or from one other member), etc
>
>We had some talk about it with my good friends of x-arn.org and d2b.org,
>maybe porculus too.
>
>Suddenly it grabbed me that the multiplication of automatic processes was
>in fact just a cheap cop-out for moderation (a process that you all know I
>abhor and, yes, consider as fascistic) and that it was even worse and too
>facile on the mind to just tick a few boxes in an interface to actually
>get rid of a person. voila, sublime technocracy!
>
>Let me tell you, as an aside, that I never use mail filters because I do
>not mind stuff filling my inbox (and subfolders for which I have filters
>as a sorting facility) and more importantly I believe that somebody may be
>boring me today (and that might very well be because of my frame of mind
>at the time, not his) but someday s/he will _certainly come up with
>something that I fancy.
>
>Anyway, I am still very much interested in using mail thru-put as raw
>matter for something else but not for list admin because I truly feel that
>an ml should rule itself, or die. Still, I had abandoned the tweakings
>because we found out that it was quite difficult to develop the channeling
>processes we dreamt of on top of something like mailman. I imagined that
>the first thing would be to design a relational database and on top of it
>the application, but I had not gone as far as nn's idea which is to
>develop also the client part: that does open up possibilities massively
>and i'd _love to participate in such a project, yes please.
>
>but, to sum it up, I believe that such software would not be able to
>replace the useful and, dare I say, homey feel of a traditional mailing
>list running on vintage majordomo with people directly
>out there.
>
>salut et fraternit?,
>f.
>
>
>-----Syndicate mailinglist--------------------
>Syndicate network for media culture and media art
>information and archive: http://www.v2.nl/syndicate
>to post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate@eg-r.isp-eg.de>
>to unsubscribe, write to <majordomo@eg-r.isp-eg.de>, in
>the body of the msg: unsubscribe syndicate your@email.adress



-----Syndicate mailinglist--------------------
Syndicate network for media culture and media art
information and archive: http://www.v2.nl/syndicate
to post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate@eg-r.isp-eg.de>
to unsubscribe, write to <majordomo@eg-r.isp-eg.de>, in
the body of the msg: unsubscribe syndicate your@email.adress