cpaul on Sat, 31 May 2003 17:50:55 +0200 (CEST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> Nettime-bold is <bleep> wrote:

> the whole thing is really easy; you create a mailing list that 
> receives everything sent to nettime-l as a forward; this list is 
> nettime-bold

> all you need to do is ask the nettime mods for including
> forward
> and you get the whole thing unfiltered. become a bold archivist!

> i am surprised why people are not more inventive when it
> comes to creating alternative channels.

as such the bold feed had a noticibly degraded signal to noise
ratio, since it was missing messages which were not originally
sent to the correct nettime-l address.  

this unfortunately reduced its usefulness as a playground for
inventiveness, for archiving, and even for reading by humans.

i am not disappointed to see that generation of nettime-bold go.
if it gives the moderators troubles, end it.

i would like to engage with an unmoderated nettime, but i think
the difficulty of accessing a raw feed in its fullness continues

From: t byfield <>
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 03:21:38 -0400
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i

> (Wed 04/04/01 at 08:32 AM +0200):
> > I think this is not enough, sorry. It is not 'occasionally' that
> > messages don't reach bold (quite ridiculous to have to say this, bold
> > was to be the raw nettime and now we have to complain to get more
> > mail!), it is very often. After my last mail to Felix it changed
> > slightly, which I am happy about, but still I have to look in the
> > archive to see what is in nettime! I should not have to be the one to do
> > this. It is a matter of correctness really. Sorry to say I think you
> > guys are incredibly sloppy when it comes to this subject of dealing with
> > the list in a correct way.
> as felix noted, <> is the admin account or
> 'listowner' of the mailing list <>. that
> is how it works, and there are good reasons for it: for example,
> so that error messages--extremely repetitive, hundreds of lines
> long, dozens per day--don't end up spewing back to a list where
> they in turn would generate still more error messages, ad infin-
> itum. there are other very practical reasons for distinguishing
> between the two addresses.
> we have explained the difference between the two addresses many
> times to many people, but, ultimately, people are at liberty to
> send mail wherever they want. if they send it to -l, it goes to
> -bold; if they don't it doesn't. maybe they understand why they
> are sending mail to one address, maybe they don't. it certainly
> isn't appropriate for the moderators to enforce 'correct' under-
> standings or actions.
> in the meantime, as felix noted in a recent message to nettime, 
> if you're unhappy with the existing setup, you're free to make 
> and maintain your own 'correct' version of -l and -bold.


#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: contact: