 |
Evolution of the List
(Joel Dunn - edited by Tim Cavileer)
The Flyfish listserver (flyfish@lsv.uky.edu) has a long and distinguished
history. Early records speculate at its formation as early as 1988, but its
archives only date back to 1990. The list has been fortunate to count among
its membership a number of people who are interested not only in the sport
of flyfishing but who have also been involved with the camaraderie of the
list and who have cared to provide direction and focus, no mean feat with
an unmoderated public list.
The succession of listowners:
-
Danny Walls, U. of Kentucky, (flyfish@lsv.uky.edu)
-
Elizabeth Brindley (interim listowner), U. of Maryland/Baltimore, not
technically a listowner but rather a postmaster at UMAB who handed it off
to Danny Walls.
-
Tom Williams, U. of Maryland/Baltimore,
-
? Erickson, 1988 (FLYFISH@UMAB.BITNET)
Note: The general concensus is that the list started sometime
in 1988 and that Tom Williams, a graduating student at UMAB, handed it off
to Elizabeth Brindley who passed the torch on to Danny Walls. One early list
member indicated that the person passing the list on to Brindley last name
was Erickson.
The Community
The Flyfish list (we call it FF@ for brevity) has developed quite a sense
of community and continuity. In addition to the list itself, the membership
has created a "companion web page"
(http://www.uky.edu/~agrdanny/flyfish/main.htm)
with not only the standard list subscription information, but also including
such diverse topics as book reviews, reading lists, surveys and polls, river
etiquette, conclave schedules and access to the list archives.
The nature of FF@ has changed much over the years. At first, with only a
few active members, it was easy to follow all discussion, both on messages
"on topic" and those that were unrelated and chatty. As late as 1992, the
most active list member only posted 136 messages, or about 2.6 messages per
week. In the same year, only 39 members of the list posted more than ten
messages annually.
However, by 1995, with over 80 messages per day, the chatty "flyshop" ambiance
was rapidly declining as was the memberships tolerance for non-topical
postings. Today there can be as many as 200 postings in a day, though typically
the volume is 100 to 150 messages. It is common for list members to read
the messages superficially if at all and to liberally use the "D" (delete)
key. In 1995 one member posted 781 messages (15 messages/week) and
another posted 627 times. In this new environment, messages which once were
encouraged postings that gave the list much community, such as notices
of births, deaths and other passages of life became burdens on bandwidth.
Even so, as one ff@ member recently put it, "... many
of the list members still consider the list to be "family", and proudly announce
births and marriages and birthdays and anniversaries, sadly announce deaths
and illnesses; in short, sharing with the list as they share with their family
and friends."
As the list grew, many of the original members found that they could not
deal with the large volume of mail and dropped off the list. The loss of
a popular "oldtimer" was typically greeted with calls for increased structure
for the list, and with calls for self-restraint in frivolous postings. The
list owner periodically posts messages stating the rules that are accepted
by the bulk of list members. There are cyclical discussions about list options
as well, particularly with respect to the "reply to:" default. Should the
list encourage the posting of replies or should the sender have to explicitly
specify the list as a destination on the message? In the interest of spontaneity
and dialog, this discussion has consistently come down on the side of
list-oriented traffic though the cost might be the loss of volume-sensitive
subscribers.
Another problem that has plagued FF@ throughout its history is the computer
skill level of its members. Some list members are technophiles and can cut,
paste and include pertinent parts of messages for replies. Other technophobes
can barely compose a new message, much less properly quote a reply, often
including a lengthy message with a few words of original content. Tolerance
for poor netiquette has always been good, but that tolerance has become more
strained as the size of the list has grown.
In the early days of the list, very few members used digest mode but as the
volume of postings grew this practice became more common. With many list
members reading the list in digest mode and with many more deleting messages
with minimal review, the searchable archive became a powerful tool to help
find particular threads (subjects) and to help follow postings by interesting
list members.
For all its growing pains, FF@, has survived and remains
the nucleus for an viable and vibrant community. Though thousands of
miles apart, the members of the list have used their common interest in
flyfishing to create real friendships and relationships that transcend simple
electronic mail messages. |