Ugh! ... the announce list is NOT FOR JOB POSTINGS!!!
This is the kind of stuff that makes me (and others) want to unsubscribe. It's *not* what the "announce" list is for, nor is is what most would want or expect it to be for. The list is supposed to be *low volume* (e.g. one to a few mailings per month) and on-topic (rather to highly relevant to BALUG). E.g., when folks sign up for a list, expecting it to be more-or-less one thing, and find it's quite something else, they tend to unsubscribe (e.g. when a PICNIX *announce* list got subverted/diverted into an sbay.org flamewar/argument/gripe list, I quickly unsubscribed).
Job announcements aren't suitable for the balug-announce list - keep 'em off there!
Only the "talk" list *may* be considered *possibly* appropriate for such. references: http://lists.balug.org/pipermail/balug-admin-balug.org/2006-February/000123.... http://lists.balug.org/pipermail/balug-talk-balug.org/2005-March/003164.html No no no!!!: http://lists.balug.org/pipermail/balug-announce-balug.org/2006-June/000064.h... http://lists.balug.org/pipermail/balug-announce-balug.org/2006-June/000065.h... http://lists.balug.org/pipermail/balug-announce-balug.org/2006-June/000066.h... et. seq. (I got 7 of these darn things today from balug-announce!)
Quoting Michael Paoli (Michael.Paoli@cal.berkeley.edu):
Ugh! ... the announce list is NOT FOR JOB POSTINGS!!!
Because it's by nature supposed to be low-traffic, I'd _strongly_ suggest that the only way it can work is if the moderation flag gets set for everyone except a small set of people trusted to post only genuinely on-topic announcements. (Other people could still post, but their postings would be held for admin attention.)
Job announcements aren't suitable for the balug-announce list - keep 'em off there!
You're preaching to the choir, Michael.
The people who are a problem are the seven you refer to, who posted transparently inappropriate messages to balug-announce-balug.org -- not to mention the innumerable people who'll probably follow their example.
Have a look at the listinfo page for that mailing list: http://lists.balug.org/listinfo.cgi/balug-announce-balug.org
Notice the lack of any indication about what is (and is not) appropriate, or even of what the list is for? Compare:
http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/conspire http://lists.svlug.org/lists/listinfo/svlug-announce%5B1]
On the former (the "conspire") list, the explicit policy includes:
While we appreciate the need for jobs postings, they easily overwhelm this small mailing list: So, you must submit them via e-mail to the listadmin, who'll decide whether to post them. Reasons why the answer has been "no" in the past have included their having already been posted to other local LUG mailing lists. (We get tired of seeing the same posts everywhere.)
For balug-announce-balug.org, I would actually strongly recommend that the listinfo page say something like this:
This list has been created for announcements relating to the Bay Area Linux User's Group. Other announcements may be approved by the listadmins or not; we'll judge appropriateness. In particular, NO jobs-offered or sought postings will be approved.
Separately and in addition, I'd personally recommend that http://lists.balug.org/listinfo.cgi/balug-talk-balug.org/ -- which, again, currently has _nothing_ about what the list's for, get something like this:
This is a general discussion forum for the Bay Area Linux User Group.
Per list policy, our (subscriber-accessible) membership roster and public message archives display unobscured posting addresses. If you're trying to hide your e-mail address from spammers, avoid this list.
While we appreciate the need for jobs postings, they easily overwhelm this small mailing list, and we ask that you take them to any of the many jobs forums such as SVLUG Jobs (http://lists.svlug.org/lists/listinfo/jobs) and BayLISA-Jobs (http://www.baylisa.org/services.shtml), instead.
I have administrative access to all three of BALUG's Mailman lists, and (physically) can implement in a flash whatever is agreed upon -- but (just to reassure people) would not do anything of the sort without a fairly high degree of consensus.
I wrote:
Notice the lack of any indication about what is (and is not) appropriate, or even of what the list is for? Compare:
http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/conspire http://lists.svlug.org/lists/listinfo/svlug-announce%5B1]
Er, footnote was supposed to be:
[1] Listinfo pages for SVLUG's mailing lists _would_ be better maintained and more informative, except the elected officers decided to change all listadmin passwords as of early 2005, and subsequently have neither maintained the mailing lists themselves nor delegated access to people more experienced in such matters. E.g., I used to fix the informational pages on the group's behalf, but for more than a year have been unable to help.
I wrote:
Quoting Michael Paoli (Michael.Paoli@cal.berkeley.edu):
Ugh! ... the announce list is NOT FOR JOB POSTINGS!!!
Because it's by nature supposed to be low-traffic, I'd _strongly_ suggest that the only way it can work is if the moderation flag gets set for everyone except a small set of people trusted to post only genuinely on-topic announcements. (Other people could still post, but their postings would be held for admin attention.)
As noted separately (but I want to be clear in correcting my error), this is already the case.
Those recent jobs postings on the announce list obviously were approved by a listadmin, probably Larry Platzek -- who has been doing essentially all the work of keeping the lists going, per my understanding.
I tend to defer to the people who get the work done, all other things being equal. ;-> (It's not the policy I'd personally choose, though.)
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, Rick Moen wrote:
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 23:12:49 -0700 From: Rick Moen rick@linuxmafia.com To: balug-admin@lists.balug.org Subject: Re: [Balug-admin] Ugh! ... the announce list is NOT FOR JOB POSTINGS!!!
I wrote:
Quoting Michael Paoli (Michael.Paoli@cal.berkeley.edu):
Ugh! ... the announce list is NOT FOR JOB POSTINGS!!!
Because it's by nature supposed to be low-traffic, I'd _strongly_ suggest that the only way it can work is if the moderation flag gets set for everyone except a small set of people trusted to post only genuinely on-topic announcements. (Other people could still post, but their postings would be held for admin attention.)
As noted separately (but I want to be clear in correcting my error), this is already the case.
Those recent jobs postings on the announce list obviously were approved by a listadmin, probably Larry Platzek -- who has been doing essentially all the work of keeping the lists going, per my understanding.
No it was not me that approved the posting! I do agree it was not the right thing to do!
I tend to defer to the people who get the work done, all other things being equal. ;-> (It's not the policy I'd personally choose, though.)
balug-admin mailing list balug-admin@lists.balug.org http://lists.balug.org/listinfo.cgi/balug-admin-balug.org
Larry Platzek larryp@inow.com
Quoting Larry Platzek (larryp@inow.com):
No it was not me that approved the posting! I do agree it was not the right thing to do!
Thanks, Larry. Maybe we should start with asking (for collective knowledge):
1. Who to your knowledge has the current listadmin password for our three mailing lists (other than you and me)? I've not passed it on to anyone, FYI.
2. Whom does e-mail to the "balugadmin@balug.org" and "balugadmin-talk@xav.to" addresses reach?
Rick Moen wrote:
Quoting Larry Platzek (larryp@inow.com):
No it was not me that approved the posting! I do agree it was not the right thing to do!
I probably should have not have let those build up in the first place.
I was fuzzy on the policy regarding how to handle them and hoped one of the other admins would lend a hand.
I am curious about who greenlighted them. I'm also somewhat disoriented by the flood of response to it. :-)
- Who to your knowledge has the current listadmin password for our
three mailing lists (other than you and me)? I've not passed it on to anyone, FYI.
I was the one who implemented the password change after a small consensus and passed it on to Larry/Dick.
My understanding is that anyone interested in assisting should contact Dick Verna or Larry Platzek for consideration, or for clarification on access changes if you've been admining in the past and were cut off.
It might be a good idea to start a CC list of admins, mods, etc. to keep BALUG maintainers up to speed with each other and generally make things less uncoordinated. I'm wary about starting actual admin topics on a public forum.
- Whom does e-mail to the "balugadmin@balug.org" and
"balugadmin-talk@xav.to" addresses reach?
I'm not sure about the first one, the second one is me. I assume the first redirects to several other people, but I haven't seen the control for that, and I've apparently been mistaken about how many active admin/mods feed off of balugadmin@balug.org...
Quoting Xavier (balug-talk@xav.to):
I probably should have not have let those build up in the first place.
I was fuzzy on the policy regarding how to handle them and hoped one of the other admins would lend a hand.
Yeah, good point. I figure it'd be a good idea to get consensus on policy, soonish, if only so we're more-or-less consistent and not hesitant.
I am curious about who greenlighted them. I'm also somewhat disoriented by the flood of response to it. :-)
People do get funny about that. Far be it from me to be critical. (My own flurry of activity reflected my trying to catch up on where we are, and try to do some good without stepping on anyone's toes.)
Larry tells me that people who _probably_ have the listadmin password are:
Larry Platzek Michael Paoli Ann E. Worley Xavier Dick Verna Rick Moen
(I don't yet have addresses for Ann or Dick, but will probably look around.)
I was the one who implemented the password change after a small consensus and passed it on to Larry/Dick.
Appreciated. Larry (about a month back, or so) passed it on to me (and possibly some others). I've passed it on to nobody.
It might be a good idea to start a CC list of admins, mods, etc. to keep BALUG maintainers up to speed with each other and generally make things less uncoordinated.
One possibility: Mailman automatically handles a -owner address for each valid mailing list, reaching all addresses in the nagmail roster for that list. At present, it appears [any of our three]-owner@lists.balug.org reaches you, Larry Pletzek, and me.
I'm wary about starting actual admin topics on a public forum.
So far, we haven't discussed anything needing privacy, however.
- Whom does e-mail to the "balugadmin@balug.org" and
"balugadmin-talk@xav.to" addresses reach?
I'm not sure about the first one, the second one is me. I assume the first redirects to several other people, but I haven't seen the control for that, and I've apparently been mistaken about how many active admin/mods feed off of balugadmin@balug.org...
This is one reason I think it's a bad idea to include "role" e-mail addresses in the nagmail roster: It obscures who's include and how many people.
In any event, Larry wrote me privately to say that "balugadmin@balug.org" reaches him, and not Michael Hubbard as I'd speculated.
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Rick Moen wrote:
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 01:36:12 -0700 From: Rick Moen rick@linuxmafia.com To: balug-admin@lists.balug.org Subject: Re: [balug-admin] [Balug-admin] Ugh! ... the announce list is NOT FOR JOB POSTINGS!!!
Quoting Xavier (balug-talk@xav.to):
I probably should have not have let those build up in the first place.
I was fuzzy on the policy regarding how to handle them and hoped one of the other admins would lend a hand.
Yeah, good point. I figure it'd be a good idea to get consensus on policy, soonish, if only so we're more-or-less consistent and not hesitant.
I am curious about who greenlighted them. I'm also somewhat disoriented by the flood of response to it. :-)
People do get funny about that. Far be it from me to be critical. (My own flurry of activity reflected my trying to catch up on where we are, and try to do some good without stepping on anyone's toes.)
Larry tells me that people who _probably_ have the listadmin password are:
Larry Platzek Michael Paoli Ann E. Worley Xavier Dick Verna Rick Moen
Michael Hubbard I think does, I think he is also balugadmin is is Dick verna.
(I don't yet have addresses for Ann or Dick, but will probably look around.)
If you do not know by now I can look them up.
I was the one who implemented the password change after a small consensus and passed it on to Larry/Dick.
Appreciated. Larry (about a month back, or so) passed it on to me (and possibly some others). I've passed it on to nobody.
It might be a good idea to start a CC list of admins, mods, etc. to keep BALUG maintainers up to speed with each other and generally make things less uncoordinated.
One possibility: Mailman automatically handles a -owner address for each valid mailing list, reaching all addresses in the nagmail roster for that list. At present, it appears [any of our three]-owner@lists.balug.org reaches you, Larry Pletzek, and me.
I'm wary about starting actual admin topics on a public forum.
So far, we haven't discussed anything needing privacy, however.
- Whom does e-mail to the "balugadmin@balug.org" and
"balugadmin-talk@xav.to" addresses reach?
I'm not sure about the first one, the second one is me. I assume the first redirects to several other people, but I haven't seen the control for that, and I've apparently been mistaken about how many active admin/mods feed off of balugadmin@balug.org...
This is one reason I think it's a bad idea to include "role" e-mail addresses in the nagmail roster: It obscures who's include and how many people.
In any event, Larry wrote me privately to say that "balugadmin@balug.org" reaches him, and not Michael Hubbard as I'd speculated.
I think Michael Hubbard, Dick Verna and me. Xavier may be on this list of balugadmin@balug.org.
I have not heard from Michael in while, hope is doing good.
balug-admin mailing list balug-admin@lists.balug.org http://lists.balug.org/listinfo.cgi/balug-admin-balug.org
Larry Platzek larryp@inow.com
Larry Platzek wrote:
I think Michael Hubbard, Dick Verna and me. Xavier may be on this list of balugadmin@balug.org.
I have not heard from Michael in while, hope is doing good.
I'm not a receiver of balugadmin@balug.org, but I manage fairly well without that.
Quoting Rick Moen rick@linuxmafia.com:
Quoting Xavier (balug-talk@xav.to): Larry tells me that people who _probably_ have the listadmin password are: Larry Platzek Michael Paoli Ann E. Worley Xavier Dick Verna Rick Moen (I don't yet have addresses for Ann or Dick, but will probably look around.)
If I'm not mistaken, I do not have the current listadmin password, but I do have "admin" access for changing the BALUG web site. If the listadmins see fit (should probably be a consensus decision) to provide me the current listadmin password, I've no objection to that. Can't promise I do or would always have time to deal with listadmin stuff ... but I of course can't really do much of anything regarding the actual administration of the lists themselves (or even inspecting their settings) if I don't have the listadmin password.
Ann's address can be derived from here: http://lists.balug.org/pipermail/balug-admin-balug.org/2006-March/000143.htm... Dick's e-mail can be found here: http://www.balug.org/ (look for the link towards right of web page, and about 2/3 of the way down the web page). I was also advised that it's often better/faster to contact Dick by phone, particularly if one needs to be sure he's made aware of something and/or it comes to his attention in a reasonably timely manner. Again, Larry or someone else might have that phone number more handily available. If it's needed, ... I've also got it, but I might have to dig a bit to locate it again (haven't needed to use it ... yet.)
I was the one who implemented the password change after a small consensus and passed it on to Larry/Dick.
Yes, probably good to change it at least once in a while (like if it gets leaked/exposed, or someone ceases to be a listadmin, or probably at least quarterly if any usage forces it to go across the network in cleartext, and probably at least yearly at a minimum in any case).
Quoting Michael Paoli (Michael.Paoli@cal.berkeley.edu):
Yes, probably good to change it at least once in a while (like if it gets leaked/exposed, or someone ceases to be a listadmin, or probably at least quarterly if any usage forces it to go across the network in cleartext, and probably at least yearly at a minimum in any case).
I used to worry about this more than I do now. Quite a bit of mischief _can_ be done by too many people holding listadmin passwords (including summary deletion of the entire mailing list from its Web admin interface), but in practice it tends not to happen.
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Michael Paoli wrote:
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 02:11:16 -0700 From: Michael Paoli Michael.Paoli@cal.berkeley.edu To: balug-admin@lists.balug.org Subject: [balug-admin] Who does/doesn't have the listadmin password, misc. contact information, etc.
Quoting Rick Moen rick@linuxmafia.com:
Quoting Xavier (balug-talk@xav.to): Larry tells me that people who _probably_ have the listadmin password are: Larry Platzek Michael Paoli Ann E. Worley Xavier Dick Verna Rick Moen (I don't yet have addresses for Ann or Dick, but will probably look around.)
If I'm not mistaken, I do not have the current listadmin password, but I do have "admin" access for changing the BALUG web site. If the listadmins see fit (should probably be a consensus decision) to provide me the current listadmin password, I've no objection to that. Can't promise I do or would always have time to deal with listadmin stuff ... but I of course can't really do much of anything regarding the actual administration of the lists themselves (or even inspecting their settings) if I don't have the listadmin password.
Ann's address can be derived from here: http://lists.balug.org/pipermail/balug-admin-balug.org/2006-March/000143.htm... Dick's e-mail can be found here: http://www.balug.org/ (look for the link towards right of web page, and about 2/3 of the way down the web page). I was also advised that it's often better/faster to contact Dick by phone, particularly if one needs to be sure he's made aware of something and/or it comes to his attention in a reasonably timely manner. Again, Larry or someone else might have that phone number more handily available. If it's needed, ... I've also got it, but I might have to dig a bit to locate it again (haven't needed to use it ... yet.)
Dick's phone is in the balug-admin archives. It was in a posting I did on 10/20/05.
When I tried to reach the balug website just now I could not reach it.
I was the one who implemented the password change after a small consensus and passed it on to Larry/Dick.
Yes, probably good to change it at least once in a while (like if it gets leaked/exposed, or someone ceases to be a listadmin, or probably at least quarterly if any usage forces it to go across the network in cleartext, and probably at least yearly at a minimum in any case). _______________________________________________ balug-admin mailing list balug-admin@lists.balug.org http://lists.balug.org/listinfo.cgi/balug-admin-balug.org
Larry Platzek larryp@inow.com
Larry Platzek wrote:
When I tried to reach the balug website just now I could not reach it.
I sent them a message to their PR department (since they seem to try hard to not hear technical problems from non-direct customers), shortly afterwards the site functionality leapt from timing out to complaining about a broken database.
So maybe they'll have it up soon.
Xavier wrote:
Larry Platzek wrote:
When I tried to reach the balug website just now I could not reach it.
I sent them a message to their PR department (since they seem to try hard to not hear technical problems from non-direct customers), shortly afterwards the site functionality leapt from timing out to complaining about a broken database.
So maybe they'll have it up soon.
Yup.
Quoting Xavier balug-talk@xav.to:
Rick Moen wrote:
Quoting Larry Platzek (larryp@inow.com):
No it was not me that approved the posting! I do agree it was not the right thing to do!
I probably should have not have let those build up in the first place.
Well, hopefully if we get the "right number" of sufficiently active folks set up as list admins, they shouldn't generally pile up to such burdensome/annoying (and hazardous or error inducing) levels.
I suggested setting the number of days such items are held before being dropped to 32 - after having noted that most or all of the lists were set to 0 (hold "forever"), and that some of the stuff that got passed through onto the lists was over a month old (and in some cases over 60 days old). Rick suggested setting it as low as 5, or even 3. I'd guestimate setting it that low should be quite workable if the stuff is reviewed and dispensed with "fast enough".
I was fuzzy on the policy regarding how to handle them and hoped one of the other admins would lend a hand.
I am curious about who greenlighted them. I'm also somewhat disoriented by the flood of response to it. :-)
Well, I (and others) have complained about them before, and when it happened again, some of that "unfinished" buisness was brought up again - seems from earlier stuff we reached agreements on lists and policys and usage and stuff, but for the most part I don't think we every got it sufficiently formalized (e.g. mostly there are just some items in the list discussion(s) and announcement(s), and there was the addition of the "admin" list to keep BALUG administrivia likely to be uninteresting to most, away from the "talk" list.)
- Who to your knowledge has the current listadmin password for our
three mailing lists (other than you and me)? I've not passed it on to anyone, FYI.
I was the one who implemented the password change after a small consensus and passed it on to Larry/Dick.
My understanding is that anyone interested in assisting should contact Dick Verna or Larry Platzek for consideration, or for clarification on access changes if you've been admining in the past and were cut off.
It might be a good idea to start a CC list of admins, mods, etc. to keep BALUG maintainers up to speed with each other and generally make things less uncoordinated. I'm wary about starting actual admin topics on a public forum.
I guess I'm of a rather/somewhat different opinion - that *most* of such stuff should be "discussed" in a public forum, and that the "admin" (balug-admin@lists.balug.org) list is fully suitable for that. It also has such advantages, as if/when we've got a new person with lots of time and interest in that general area, they can read/skim the "admin" archives (and "announce" items) going back a fair while, and get "up to speed" relatively quickly on history/decisions/issues/actions, etc. For any and/or all items that should not be publicly accessible, those can always be handled via separate e-mail - e.g. "talks"/negotiations/communications on arranging speaker(s) for meetings and other things of that nature are typically handled via non-list e-mail. Whether or not we want to add a separate "private" distribution list is a separate and debatable item (with its various pros and cons).
As I suggested earlier, probably useful for those of us available and interested and/or with a particular stake in these matters, to discuss such administrivia at our next BALUG meeting at one of the tables. I think per Rick's mention, it's good to have the "discussion" in e-mail or on list, to formalize and document it ... but we can probably do that after the BALUG meeting to further/"complete" whatever discussions we had at the meeting, and to document results/conclusions, actions to be taken, etc.
- Whom does e-mail to the "balugadmin@balug.org" and
I'm not sure about the first one, the second one is me. I assume the first redirects to several other people, but I haven't seen the control for that, and I've apparently been mistaken about how many active admin/mods feed off of balugadmin@balug.org...
Quoting Michael Paoli (Michael.Paoli@cal.berkeley.edu):
I suggested setting the number of days such items are held before being dropped to 32 - after having noted that most or all of the lists were set to 0 (hold "forever"), and that some of the stuff that got passed through onto the lists was over a month old (and in some cases over 60 days old). Rick suggested setting it as low as 5, or even 3. I'd guestimate setting it that low should be quite workable if the stuff is reviewed and dispensed with "fast enough".
FYI, as of yesterday, I made the judgement call to change it from the default of 0 (forever) to 7.
Well, I (and others) have complained about them before, and when it happened again, some of that "unfinished" buisness was brought up again - seems from earlier stuff we reached agreements on lists and policys and usage and stuff, but for the most part I don't think we every got it sufficiently formalized (e.g. mostly there are just some items in the list discussion(s) and announcement(s), and there was the addition of the "admin" list to keep BALUG administrivia likely to be uninteresting to most, away from the "talk" list.)
Just as something to warn about (and I'm certainly as guilty of this as anyone), key information existing only in mailing list threads is likely to be not apparent when needed. One really wants to condense such things down, and record them on a Web page. (Short stuff can and should be put on Mailman listinfo pages, in my view, and can cross-reference longer stuff on ordinary Web pages.)
As I suggested earlier, probably useful for those of us available and interested and/or with a particular stake in these matters, to discuss such administrivia at our next BALUG meeting at one of the tables. I think per Rick's mention, it's good to have the "discussion" in e-mail or on list, to formalize and document it ...
I'd add the proviso above. ;->