jamcmullan@watmath.UUCP (Judy McMullan) (02/16/84)
>I know it sounds as though I am trying to be argumentative, but I >would like to get a few clarifications on these points: > 1) Would you prefer that the group be moderated and that > the moderator keep the mailing list? >Is the group just a mailing list, i.e an mail alias for a bunch >of people? How do people who are not in it join? by asking the >moderator? One way I had thought of, to effect such a list, would be for one person (I volunteered to be that person) to collect the names of all those interested in being on the mailing list. Since I would be the only one who knew all names, I would pass the complete list to all those on the list. Anyone who wished to be added would not know the list, so they would have to mail me and I would 1) mail their name to all those already on the list and 2) mail the new person the list. Everyone on the list would have the list and could send the group mail. With a moderator, only the moderator knows the complete list. All mail is sent to the moderator and the moderator forwards it to everyone on the list. This prevents the malicious from getting the list and sending flames or hate mail to everyone (unless the malicious person gets the list from the moderator). The moderator also has the power to NOT forward mail she judges to be inappropriate. Clear now? > 2) Do we want women only on the list? (and how can we tell > if someone is bogus??) >I think it depends on what the topics discussed will be, if it is >simply feminism, then I think men should definitely participate. >What would be the reasons for keeping the men out? Well, that is what I am asking. Do we want a mailing list of (1) feminists (2) women only (3) women feminists only? Don't ask me reasons for keeping men out. Ask someone who wants to. The idea keeps coming up. I, personally, am interested in (1) but would probably enjoy the discussions from any of the above. The whole idea arose because people were tired of stupid flames in net.women.only and explaining the basic tenets of feminism in net.women. > 3) Do we want only feminists on the list? (I think we could > spot those who are bogus pretty quickly but the ringer > could have the name list by then and bug us all with stupid > mail). >What is the definition of a feminist. Is it something like the >one I posted some time ago, or is it completely different? Gee. That's a tough one. There are too many definitions! I am willing to accept self-definition. i.e. those who believe they are feminists ARE feminists until they prove (to the majority of the group) otherwise. --from the sssstickkky keyboard of J.A.M. ...!{allegra|decvax}!watmath!jamcmullan