[GSBN] Admin: Proposal for Non-posting subscribers

[Maurice Bennett]

The wider the audience the wider the acceptance of all that this group attempts to foster.  The membership should not be opened to one and all but the information certainly deserves to be available.

So are we advocating Occupy GSBN?

MHB

On Dec 11, 2011, at 04:50 PM, Bruce King <bruce at ecobuildnetwork.org> wrote:

>
> Sounds like a great idea to me.  I don't remember writing or reading anything here that couldn't be made public.  And anyway, as you say we're all aware that once you send an email anywhere, it's public or at least findable.  
>
> Let's not go hiding our torches or candles or sometimes teensy burning match ends under bushel baskets.  Let GSBN free!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bruce King
> bruce at bruce-king.com
>  
> (415) 987-7271
> Twitter: @EBNetwork
> bruceking.posterous.com
>
> On Dec 11, 2011, at 3:12 PM, Bill Christensen wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> As y'all might know by now, the GSBN discussions are interesting and popular, not just with GSBN folks but with others in the straw building world as well.
>>
>> We've long made the archives available to all.  Google and other search engines regularly crawl the archives, so they're easily searchable by putting "GSBN" and your topic in the search field.
>>
>> But we also regularly get requests from non GSBN people who just want to be able to receive and read the emails and learn from them, without participating in the discussion.  I just got another compelling request the other day which caused me to re-think things.
>>
>> Right now, GSBN is set up as an invitation-only list.  I'm the only one who can subscribe people.  If instead we changed the setup such that *anyone* can subscribe but only specific people (the current and future invited membership) can post to the discussion, with any other posts to the list getting rejected/returned to the sender, I think we can expand GSBN's influence.  The whole point is to spread knowledge of best practices, after all.
>>
>> One change which would come from this is that those of us with multiple addresses would have to post from the correct one or we'll receive a rejection notice.  Up til now I've been getting a notice any time one of you does that, then going in and reviewing the message and manually approving them for publication to the list.  That won't happen any more.
>>
>> The only other potential downside - and it's sort of a moot point since the archives are published automatically - is that we would want to watch what we say about specific problems with specific projects.  Not naming owners or builders or otherwise pointing fingers that could be followed by insurance companies or lawyers, for instance.  I think we're all pretty careful about that anyway as most of us have been on the internet long enough to know that no email is truly private.
>>
>> I'm not attached to the decision either way but I'd like to hear some of your thoughts.
>>
>> -- 
>> Bill Christensen
>>
>> <http://SustainableSources.com>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GSBN mailing list
>> GSBN at sustainablesources.com
>> http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN
>
> _______________________________________________
> GSBN mailing list
> GSBN at sustainablesources.com
> http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sustainablesources.com/pipermail/gsbn/attachments/20111212/8427ecc2/attachment.htm>