[tei-council] Setting up read-only access to TEI Council list?

[Martin Holmes]

On 12-05-18 12:05 PM, Piotr Bański wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think it's one thing to provide public access to e-mail archives in
> the interest of full openness, and another to know that all the e-mails
> we write ->to the other members of the Council<- are obligatorily sent
> into the mailboxes of other people. This seems to me to be pushing the
> boundaries of good practice and politeness into the zone of politically
> overcorrect exhibitionism, and I don't like the thought of being
> involved in that.
>
> I don't write to "other people", when I write to this list -- I write to
> the Council. When I want to write to other people, I use TEI-L, or, in
> rare and I believe justified cases, CC them openly...

I must admit I felt a little uneasy myself about this, but I couldn't 
pin down why; your post has clarified it a bit for me. I also wonder 
what the likely outcomes of this might be. When someone is subscribed to 
an email list, and reading it, they will inevitably feel at some point 
that they want to get involved in the conversation that's going on. The 
only ways open to a non-Council-member would be:

  - email Council members directly, and ask that their opinions be 
injected into the discussion

  - take the topic over to TEI-L, and invite the broader community to 
respond.

Neither of these options seems like a good outcome to me, and both would 
be likely to derail or inhibit discussions on the Council list to some 
degree. We would most likely see contentious issues being discussed more 
off-list than on, through private email, and then they wouldn't be 
archived.

I think I would write differently, and probably less frequently, if I 
felt the Council list was being distributed to a larger group of people, 
many of whom I didn't know. That feels somehow different from the 
discussion being archived at Virginia, although I'm not quite sure why.

Cheers,
Martin

>
> Thanks for considering this,
>
>    P.
>
> On 18/05/12 16:56, Gabriel BODARD wrote:
>> Agreed. Not sure I like the idea of duplicating the list in any of the
>> various ways suggested. If we're setting people up to be able to receive
>> but not post, why not just make them moderated members of the existing
>> list? It seems counter-intuitive, but it is identical in every way to
>> what is being suggested with the "outsiders" list.
>>
>> Is there a technically easy way to set up an RSS feed from the archives?
>> Easier than web-scraping, I mean, for which there must exist tools
>> already...
>>
>> G
>>
>> On 18/05/2012 15:51, Martin Holmes wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12-05-18 07:21 AM, James Cummings wrote:
>>>> On 18/05/12 14:23, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
>>>>> a) Add as a member of tei-council an address like
>>>>> council-outsiders at lists.village.virginia.edu , which we would advertise
>>>>> so that those interested could subscribe.  Members of that list would
>>>>> receive messages sent to tei-council, and we would trust that they
>>>>> wouldn't ever send a message to tei-council with
>>>>> "council-outsiders at lists.village.virginia.edu" as the sender in order to
>>>>> post.
>>>>
>>>> They could most likely be set to not having posting abilities (or
>>>> their posts to be moderated).
>>>>
>>>>> b) Add as a member of tei-council some email address hooked up to an
>>>>> email-to-RSS service and then publicize the feed URL.
>>>>> The advantage to (a) is that it allows threading of messages, whereas
>>>>> feeds (b) do not.  But (a) would also create an entirely duplicated
>>>>> message archive.
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't another option be to get the mailing list archived by
>>>> one of the services which currently archive the TEI-L mailing list?
>>>
>>> I thought the archives were already public here:
>>>
>>> <http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2012/date.html#start>
>>>
>>> I don't see much point in duplicating the archive, unless the
>>> alternative site has better searching and browsing functionality.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Martin
>>>
>>>
>>
>