Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 14:07:44 -0400 From: Gravity Boy (keith@DGVIS.ER.USGS.GOV) Subject: Re: question about 4ad-l itself at Oct 7, 96 09:36:24 am > > approximate date of the inception of 4ad-l > > This is up to debate. I joined in late 1992, and I know the list was up before > then. Many of the people I knew on the list then aren't still on now. I'm sure > Jens or Lars could answer this one more accurately. well, i joined the list back in early '89, and i seem to remember the archives went back to sometime in '88 (november sticks in my head). the person who would really know this would be Jim Jones (the 4ad-l founder) but i think he's given up completely on the list. Brant Nelson probably was on before me... what ever happened to the earliest archives? it was kind of fun when there was only 3-5 posts *A WEEK* :) oh, and for you total net-geeks. the original list was on BITNET! Keith ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Keith Richmond keith@dgvis.er.usgs.GOV US Geological Survey, Reston, VA web page - http://dgvis.er.usgs.GOV/~keith/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 12:06:59 -0700 From: Dewdrops Records (nelson@ASTRO.UCLA.EDU) Subject: Re: question about 4ad-l itself I seem to remember joining right around the time Dewdrops started in late 89/early 90. I used to keep a complete archive that went back as far as the earliest file on jhuvm when I joined, but I think I dumped it all a while ago, thinking "what the hell would I ever use this for anyway?" I'll check my records and see what I find. Back in the early days two of the regular posters were Yary Hluchan and Julian Lawton. Both have moved on it seems. And whatever happened to Woj (Rob Woiccak) anyway? brant Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 14:15:19 -0400 From: lee harvey fnordwald (owilde@UMICH.EDU) Subject: Re: question about 4ad-l itself On Mon, 7 Oct 1996, John Roseborough wrote: > I'd be interested in seeing this paper once you've finished, if you don't mind > How about HTMLing it? here it is. my footnotes and appendix are heavily formatted, and therefore are not included here. i appreciate all suggestions, but the paper gets handed in tonite, so make em snappy! Daniel Klyn Assignment 1, LIS 742 Prof. Brown-Seyd Monday, October 7, 1996 "To know the old element explore a new" Emerson Anyone still actively using listserv will agree that the simplicity, relative privacy, and overall decorum of the listserv culture combine to create an almost idyllic forum for topical discussion. Almost idyllica mode of being known (among others) to the serpent in the garden, to Eve and Adam, and eventually to all of us who can't help but want something a little (or a lot) better. Perhaps it is this same primal impulse which compels us to experiment with the relatively new-fangled usenet newsgroups. I personally have found a usenet group for each of the five listservs I subscribe togroups which address the same topic areas as my listservs, but in a completely different format. Usenet is easy to access with any of the popular web browsers, and features an ergonomic, click-and-point interface. Threads can be plotted visually and followed without diversion in usenet, and users can include embedded html tags within the bodies of their messages to allow smooth switching in-between their messages and the world wide web pages being refered to. These capabilities are unique to usenet, and combine to make usenet an attractive format for topical discussions. So why then do I still actively use the listservs, in addition to reading usenet news? I hope to answer this question by comparing a particular listserv to a particular newsgroup and by sorting out the features, strengths, and drawbacks of each. The particular point of each of my example groups is discussion regarding an independent record label called 4AD, which is home to groups like Dead Can Dance, His Name Is Alive, and (until 1989) the Cocteau Twins. 4AD is also the home of graphic design group v23, and graphic artist Vaughn Oliver. The label is unique in its cultivation of a "house style," and in its dedication to excellence in record sleeve design. There are more than 400 subscribers to 4AD-L@american.edu, and an average of twenty messages per day are distributed to the unmoderated list . One unique feature of the list is its maintainance of an extensive FAQ , a copy of which is mailed to everyone who subscribes to the list. Besides providing a standard list of abbreviations and a guide to 4ad catalogue numbering, perhaps the most essential element of the FAQ is its explanation of the concept of "thislistyness." Thislistyness refers to the content of messages sent to the list, and the FAQ provides examples of what sorts of topics are considered "thislisty." While 4AD-L is dedicated to the discussion of all things produced by 4AD, there are groups and musicians on other labels who are still considered thislisty. Cocteau Twins, for example, are still thislisty despite their departure from the label in 1989. Other groups like Ride and the Sundays are specified in the FAQ as having a thislisty sound, and are therefore fair game for discussion even though they both have never recorded for 4AD. The FAQ and the governing principle of thislistyness ensure that most messages distributed to the list are topical and worthwhile. Basic fact-related questions posted to the list are often replied to with an appeal for the author to read the FAQ. While 4AD-L is an unmoderated list, several"authorities" on the list help to keep the discussion honest, and include an A&R rep for the label (although his .sig makes no mention of his being employed by 4AD) and at least one member of a thislisty band Conventions like thislistyness, the use of catalogue numbers in reference to specific 4AD and v23 products, and a standardized list of abbreviations for groups and album-names are encouraged by and flow out from the format of listserv itself. The list creator(s) have the option of removing the subscriptions of particularly obnoxious listmembers if they refuse to adhere to the conventions of the list, and in the rare instance of somebody spamming the list, several of the 460-some listmembers make a point of contacting the spammer's isp and filing a complaint. In addition, the list is monitored by fans, artists, and corporate types: many of whom are eager to show off their knowledge by correcting errors in the postings of others. This serves as a sort of peer-review for the list, and compels contributors to check the facts before sending them to the list. As an avid listener and collector of 4AD records, I find 4AD-L an indispensable resource for questions, and a stimulating forum for discussion. Especially as opposed to alt.music.4ad. Alt.music.4ad is a usenet newsgroup with all of the modern conveniences, and each time I read it I am reminded of precisely why it is that I still subscribe to 4AD-L. While the specific differences between these two discussion groups may have something to do with the ALT in alt.music.4ad, there are generic differences which librarians and other information providers should be aware of when pointing patrons to these resources. As mentioned earlier, the usenet interface is (depending upon the browser) very easy to use and allows for simpler tracking of discussion threads due to the graphical layout of the articles on the user's screen. The technology is effective and seductive, and with most libraries now providing web-connected computer terminals to the public, usenet will certainly become available at a rate and with an ease which may leave listserv far behind. Listserv, in comparison, is only available through an internet email account; a luxury which the majority of public library patrons may not yet enjoy and which is not provided temporarily at library computer terminals. The dramatic difference in access between the 4AD listserv and the 4AD newsgroup is evident in several aspects. Alt.music.4ad sees about ten times the amount of daily traffic that the listserv does, and in my opinion the newsgroup suffers markedly from this volume and ease of access. Ive included an example of the spam which ends up in alt.music.4ad in the appendix, and my reader is encouraged to check up on the newsgroup in order to get a sense of the terrific spamming which plagues it. A dizzying range of off topic posts--from hard-core pornography URLs to isp advertisements--show up every day. Crossposting is frequent, and shameless. Again, this may have something to do with alt.music.4ads designation as an alternative discussion group, but this alone cannot account for the spam. Being a member of four other listservs, and being an avid reader of at least four other newsgroups, I can report that the volume and quality of newsgroup postings versus listservs of identical topic areas is similar across-the-board. So why, given the general content-poverty that characterizes usenet, do I still read usenet news? Because Im a net-head, and an information junkie, and usenet is a great place to get information: if you are willing to wade through the noise. Usenet also tends to move faster, and users interested in the very latest information on a particular topic can often find it first in usenet. I remain subscribed to listservs chiefly because of usenets shortcomings. Theres something personal and intimate about listserv, even if it is a robot that handles the distribution of articles. There is also a recourse to action against misuse with listserv which helps to keep the discussion focused and relevant. Almost ideal. The technology of usenet is seductive, and makes us want something better for listserv. But until the technology is created, until a usenet-like system can be constructed which allows for some sort of filtering of superfluous postings, I will continue to use both.