[OPE-L:100] [OPE-L:336] the *new* list archives policy

Gerald Levy (glevy@pratt.edu)
Sun, 15 Nov 1998 16:44:17 -0500 (EST)

Inasmuch as no one has objected to Duncan's proposal in [OPE-L:230] to
open the archives as explained below, I am hereby (as I said I would
in #313), concluding that we have consensus.

The archives are now open!

Unfortunately, I have been unable to get through to Iwao despite repeated
efforts in the last two weeks since he is having problems receiving
e-mail. (Our www archives are hosted by Iwao and he would have to make any
technical changes).

What I would like to see happen is for the archives to be restructured so
that the old password system is eliminated and replaced with a screen that
briefly explains the archives policy and asks that you indicate that you
understand and agree to adhere to that policy before you can then move
into the archives themselves. Thus, by the time anybody accesses the
archives, that person must have already agreed to not indicate the author
of any post that is quoted.

Once this is done, I can send out messages to a few select lists (e.g.
PEN-L) which informs them of the fact that the archives are now open and
public subject to the condition described in Duncan's proposal. Then,
anyone can forward that message to any other lists.

In the meantime, you can inform concerned individuals of the new policy
and the archives url and password system. If they don't understand
the policy, ask them to contact me. Please don't advertise it, though,
until we are able to make the changes described above.

In solidarity, Jerry

>From Duncan's [OPE-L:230]
> I'd like to see the archives opened with some simple, enforceable, and
> easily understandable policy that would let people see what's being said
> and protect against the possible misuse of the material for quotation. I
> guess my favorite idea is a "Bourbaki" kind of policy in which people can
> quote the archive as much as they want to, but only cite it as OPE-L
> generically, so that no member of the list has to defend every word that he
> or she posts. This is simple, and I don't see any particular flaw in it,
> though it would also prevent individual members of the list from claiming
> polemical credit for particular exchanges, as well. But it would get the
> ideas out in the public domain.