Whether an email distributions list like Yahoo! Groups or an online forum like the many that exist on the Internet, managing the activities and exchanges of the group requires a steady and restrained hand. The arena of mind-to-mind intercourse is booby-trapped and perilous, and few people have any idea what they are doing.
What makes me qualified to observe practices on this subject? For one, I have been running online discussion groups since June 1994. That's more than sixteen years, long before most people had desktop computers, no less Internet access. I started the CyberVPM group then, and in December of that year started Ghostletters. Both are still thriving. Though I handed the reins of both groups over to others at one point or another, I like to think the foundation I set up is at least in part responsible for such longevity in a medium not known for long histories. I also have made money with lists. One I sold to a professional association for a nice sum, and Yahoo actually paid for me to switch both to their new Yahoo! Groups platform. That is not what I set out to do, but it was reward for the size, effectiveness and durability of the groups.
...censor the reading, not the writingI was enough of a pioneer in this area that I so got the joke when Donna of The West Wing counseled her boss, Josh, about interacting with moderators of such groups. He had thought he could engage the members of a group devoted specifically to him and was surprised when its moderator absolutely trashed him. Donna explained, "Moderators of these groups are chain-smoking mu mu-wearing women" for whom the group is their opportunity for power. Overstated and unfair, of course, to apply to all or even most moderators, but they are still out there. On one knitting/crochet group I started sharing my computer skills by making mailing labels out of the distribution lists. I was asked to leave because this benignity was perceived as trying "to take over the group." I think we had a mu mu in this situation.
So my secrets...what are they? I hope discussion group moderators everywhere will read and think about the following.
1. Definitely create guidelines for participation based on the core purpose of your group. I said, core purpose, not your personal druthers or desire for power. Too many guidelines stifles exchange. Too few can do the same. Be judicious.
2. No matter how many guidelines you have, communicate effectively about them. No, not just a list, but give examples, explain succinctly their purpose, then monitor adherence for the possibility that the guidelines may have been unclear.
3. To moderate or not to moderate posts? If you have no life and want to be glued to your computer day and night, fine, moderate. But it's better to "censor the reading and not the writing." No one is forced to read every freakin' post on a list. If there is someone who is misbehaving, tell readers to skip that person's posts if they don't like them.
4. Don't overreact to other group members' complaints. No, you can't please everyone. If you act on every infuriated off list communication, you will spend your time adjusting and readjusting your groups. As stated above, it is generally preferable to simply tell the complainer that if they don't like someone's posts, they don't have to read them. Another aphorism of mine is "Write carefully and read generously." If they threaten to quit, then let them. If they were getting something out of the group, they will be back. If you are afraid they will have a bad influence on your group's reputation, bear in mind that they probably do this other places and that other people will take their complaints with a grain of salt.
A hands-off policy is always preferable, since it permits the greatest vitality and creativity in a group. If your group has a broad appeal, you need to be humble in watching how they interact. Be a shepherd, not a mule driver. Quality of the product is what is at stake.
... write carefully and read generously