Re: Syndicate: Bans & Free Speech

[Amy Alexander <plagiari@plagiarist.org>]

hi patrick and all,

i think you raise some interesting issues which are worth thinking about
on a scope larger than the NN issue. especially since there will probably
always be some Problematic Persona (PP), who some want to read and for
others "ruins" the list.  it's been suggested that the PP in discussion at
the moment is actually a computer program. should that be grounds for
disqualification, or would some consider that aesthetically interesting,
and free expression on the part of the programmers?  it's been suggested
that our PP is merely posting to create a mystique which assists in
marketing its commercial software. again, if true, some may consider this
grounds for disqualification;  others may continue to be interested in
PP's texts in this context, still others may point out the blurry lines
that can creep up between resisting dominant cultures and commercialism,
such as arose on some lists regarding the alternative top-level-domain
project.

so maybe it's the interface that's the problem. some suggest that the
answer to a PP is user-applied filtering, but other readers don't know how
to filter. perhaps a Filtering FAQ at minimum would be helpful. it would
need to include all the popular mail programs. and it would still be
problematic, because, as has been demonstrated, anyone at any moment can
become a PP. and also, for people who do client-side filtering (most
people), they still have to wait/pay to download all the messages. but i
think it would help alleviate things a lot.

the listserv as a distribution means makes me think of the recent articles
in some of the mainstream media about the current "dumb" internet vs. a
hypothetical "smart" one.  "dumb" internet means the internet doesn't know
what is being sent across it; the "smarts" is in the application. some
corporations are blaming the "dumb" internet for their lack of profits,
saying they can't control it so therefore they've got no way to control
quality/reliability and thus the failed profits.  corporations like
microsoft are developing "smart" systems for the internet, such as .NET,
in which they control access centrally.  (translation: keey paying
microsoft money or lose access to your software.)

"dumb" and "smart" as used here aren't value judgments (not from me at
least), but rather a description of where the "brains" (control) of the
communication network are located.

a list or BBS can be thought of as parallelling this dumb/smart structure.
an unmoderated listserv is "dumb" at the headend, and if you don't filter,
then it becomes "dumb" at the client end too. on the other hand, some
people filter, and so for them, the app is "smart." but the non-filtering
people probably don't think of it this way, and for many of them, the
signal-to-noise ratio seems too low. on top of that, some s*bscribers are
paying for the bandwidth to download the messages before they can filter;
others have no bandwidth fees, and still others have the ability to filter
on the server.

the irony is, listservs are often chosen for discussion groups over, say,
web-based forums, because they have very little technical requirement of
the user - after all, it's just ASCII text e-mail - and can work on any
computer. a very egalitarian thing; everyone's got equal access to the
data as long as they've got a computer, a modem, and basic internet
access, right? oops - not really the case anymore. we're really not all
dealing with the same list - nowadays there's a lot of "smartness" - or
not - happening on the client end - and in all different flavors.

there are some who suggest that maybe Syndicate is over, that it's
outlived its usefulness. but maybe it's the listserv format that's
outlived its usefulness? are there other possible options/modifications?

the slashdot format comes to mind as an example. NOTE: i am not suggesting
that the slashdot format should be literally applied to syndicate, or any
other listserv. there are various reasons why
i think that would not be a good idea. and it's certainly not perfect
for slashdot itself. but i think its format is worth
looking at as a bouncing off point for idea-mulling. some features:

1) readers have the choice of reading comments in chronological order,
threaded, or by rating points. they also can set a threshold of ratings,
so that low rated posts (presumably trolls) don't show up in their
browser. or they can read them all.

2) readers "moderate" one another's comments. but moderation never means
the comment is deleted; only that it gains or subtracts points.
Problematic Personalities are likely to have their comments moderated down
to -1 (troll), but they can still be read by those who wish to. (of course
this process is itself wildly problematic, as ideologies and other things
can of course play a part, but...)

3) currently-moderating readers are "meta-moderated" by other readers to
prevent abuse (hopefully.) readers who are consistently meta-moderated as
being bad moderators lose moderator privileges.

4) anyone who wants to post anonymously (Anonymous Coward) starts out with
0 points; anyone posting under their real nick starts with 1, each time
they post. most trolls post as AC. so, if you want to read slashdot
without all the PP posts, you set your threshold to 0 or -1. you are
choosing to let the community at large decide what is troll and what is
not, as opposed to downloading a page full of PP posts. if on the other
hand you want to see the PP posts, then you set your threshold to show
everything. (you still have other options to sort by thread, etc.)

4a) some Anonymous Coward's aren't trolls; they're people who need to post
anonymously to protect themselves from whomever. those posts can be and
are moderated up, despite the one-point handicap they start out with.

5) the whole thing is wildly problematic of course. but it's interesting
in that a) it has "smart" aspects at the individual client end but also in
the user community at large. yet there is very little "smart"
*centralized* control, as there is in the microsoft .NET example

b) every user has the same semi-smart interface.  (the web browser.) of
course web browsers are different, but i believe it even works fine with
lynx (text-based browser.)

of course, one *big* drawback is that you have to stay online to really
read slashdot; you can't download it via POP and then disconnect - not
very good if you're paying for your online time.

to reiterate: i'm not suggesting that syndicate or any other listserv
should be converted to slashcode or any other web-based system. however, i
think it could be useful to consider whether an alternative structure
could be developed. maybe offering a client-side app that could work with
downloaded mail and allow users to more easily sort messages? maybe two
separate streams of the listserv (something like there are on rhizome and
nettime, but with less centralized moderation);  one which includes all
mail, and one which filters out or makes a daily digest of messages by
people who send more than 20 messages a week (or some other criteria... )

those aren't terribly creative or great suggestions specifically, but
again, my point is really to point out that everyone is not experiencing
the same list, that e-mail is not an egalitarian experience - people have
access to different technology and have different knowlege levels in how
to filter, sort, download, etc...  so perhaps there can be ways to address
that, or at the very least acknowledge it.


-@


On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, patrick lichty wrote:

>
> So far, I have outlined an argument aimed at mapping the issues at
> stake regarding free speech on listservs.  Next, what could be some
> protocols for culling the signal to noise ratio?
>
-- 

plagiarist.org
Recontextualizing script-kiddyism as net-art for over 1/20 of a century.


-----Syndicate mailinglist--------------------
Syndicate network for media culture and media art
information and archive: http://www.v2.nl/syndicate
to post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate@eg-r.isp-eg.de>
to unsubscribe, write to <majordomo@eg-r.isp-eg.de>, in
the body of the msg: unsubscribe syndicate your@email.adress