Maybe a new idea is emerging here, as a middle ground between auto-
posting and scit.moderated and individual author's cross-posting to
SCIT: Instead of solicting volunteers for scit.moderated, can we
expend (evidently far less) effort to pick TELUSA articles to be
posted to scit? If the authors indicate as such (using the above
subject line mechanism), then there is no debate. Else, the
"TELUSA-SCIT liaison person(s)" ;-) can post a significant number
of TELUSA articles to scit. It is upto individual telusa contributors
to indicate if they don't want their article to be posted. If they
don't, it becomes a potential candidate for cross post to SCIT.
Maybe this is worth a try.
My reasons for hesitating to vote "yes" on auto cross-post:
- SCIT has a much broader charter;
- an excessive rate of saahityam articles will invite flames and
negative posts, contrary to the civility that Jampala garu has
observed with the 3/4 posts there;
- such posts will essentially drive out any other intersting stuff
from scit (note that TELUSA is a purely literary grp, we don't
even discuss issues *related* to literature - which could
include anything from politics to economics to caste system)
- eventually, TELUSA will also grow in size (more publicity =>
more subscribers => more in my mailbox than I can handle and
related problems). this is not necessarily good for several
reasons.
However, since the yea voters on this seem to believe very strongly
that it is a good idea, I will abstain from voting so as not to
increase the final no votes.
My reasons for hesitating about scit.moderated:
- finding moderators is a huge task; and keeping them on the job for
an extended period is an even bigger task. Coordination between
3-5 moderators may also present a problem.
- will the moderator also impose/demand civility?
But we need to discuss more on this one. Is there a chance for
defeat if we were to put scit.moderated for RFD and CFV?
--sreenivas-- dsr@vnet.ibm.com