On Fri, 9 Feb 1996 13:45:09 +0000 (GMT) Rosalee McReynolds wrote: >Birdie, > I'm a little confused about where I send messages in reply to queries >posted on SERIALST. I recently sent a message about Chem Abstracts to >SERIALST@uvmvm.uvm.edu, and got a reply from the L-Soft list server >at UVMVM that it was being forwarded to the list moderator: >SEREDIT@UVMVM.BITNET. Is this where messages should be sent? Or should >they go to you personally? Please unconfuse this e-mail neophyte. Rosalee, I hope you don't mind that I am taking some liberty in copying SERIALST in my reply to your message, as this question has come up on more than one occasion, so I suspect others may be confused, as well! First of all, the correct address for submitting a message SERIALST is indeed: SERIALST@UVMVM.UVM.EDU or SERIALST@UVMVM.BITNET SERIALST, as a moderated discussion list (running under the L-Soft mailing list software application, also known as LISTSERV) is configured to route incoming mail to an editors' sublist called "SEREDIT". SEREDIT essentially allows for collaborative moderation of SERIALST in that it enables all of SERIALST's (3) moderators to review incoming mail simultaneously. Mail that is approved by the moderators (per the SERIALST Scope & Purpose document) is then forwarded, by the designated moderator, to the list of subscribers. What you, and presumably all SERIALST message-senders receive prior to their posted message, is an automated acknowledgment (or "reply") from the listserver -- the same acknowledgment that you note above -- that your mail is being routed to the list's moderator(s) via the SEREDIT function. (and BTW, I note that your message re. Chem Abstracts was posted to SERIALST subscribers on Wed, 7 Feb.) Another question that has emerged in recent days is in regard to fluctuations and various discrepancies in the "from" line in the headers of messages posted to SERIALST. Why does some mail appear to come "from" the original sender of the message and other mail come "from" one of the SERIALST moderator's personal address(es)? This has to do with the way the moderators' three different local e-mail systems interact with the SERIALST listserver configuration. The UVMVM mainframe's IBM/CMS L-Mail system allows mail to be forwarded to SERIALST while preserving the original message-sender's name in the "from" line of the header, while the Vax and Unix mail systems used to distribute messages forwarded by SERIALST's Associate Moderators (Ann Ercelawn and Marcia Tuttle) replace the original message-sender's name(s) in the header's "from" line with that of the moderator's (this is also true for digested messages forwarded from me via the local UVMVM mainframe). While we realize that discrepancies in the "from" line occasionally cause confusion for subscribers, we generally include original-author's names in "subject" lines of messages when the "from" line is replaced by the name of the moderator. This is just one of the behind-the-scenes technicalities that we haven't been able to address with consistency as we moderate the list from different geographical locales and with different e-mail systems. Finally, the question of why we take the time and trouble to moderate SERIALST was recently asked (this came up in private correspondence regarding a subscriber's confusion about the discrepancies in the "from" lines of SERIALST's mail headers). In a nutshell, we moderate for two reasons: (1) to keep the list on-Scope (per the SERIALST Scope & Purpose document); and (2) to make optimal efficiency of the computer resources available to us. Consider, for example, an average mail volume of between 80,000- 100,000 messages per DAY on one mainframe computer supporting a half dozen listserv applications ... routing mail to thousands of individual recipients while also being busy supporting a number of other important, non-listserv -related applications. Consider the additional cost and burden (not to mention irritation and embarrassment) of needless e-mail distribution (2350+ subscribers on SERIALST alone) of the occasional mis-directed message and the more frequent kinds of "SPAMS" (i.e., mass e-mail distributed messages, generally asking network users to buy something) that SERIALST's LISTSERV software generally filters (with a moderated check) on an average of once a week. ... One could say, in short, that we moderate to digest like-messages and conserve bandwith -- and, of course, to ensure that the focus of the discussions remains with "serials in libraries" and/or announcements and concerns related to SERIALST's "serials in libraries" constituents. Is it worth the time and trouble of moderating? Some may not think so ... some of you *told* me in the SERIALST subscriber survey that was sent out last fall that you do not think so ... However, more of you said that you liked and preferred the moderated format and appreciated the effort that went into it ... I think that I can safely say that the moderators and the person catching the error message returns (bane of listowner!) think so, too ... or we wouldn't be doing it. (For more information about Internet discussion lists and computer resources, I highly recommend an article that appeared in the _Chronicle of Higher Education_ (Nov. 3, 1995) p. A34-A36, "Burden on Computers Causes Concern Over Internet Discussion Lists" by David W. Wilson). <soap box off> Sorry for running on. I know this is more than Rosalee inquired about. However, her question elicited thoughts about various questions that have appeared in my mailbox this past week regarding generalities about why some things are the way they are on SERIALST and I thought I'd post a reply to the list, in the event that some of these questions and concerns are of more general interest. Regards, Birdie MacLennan SERIALST Listowner/Moderator bmaclenn@uvmvm.uvm.edu University of Vermont bmaclenn@moose.uvm.edu