Stephen Weimar wrote: > Thanks very much for that idea. > > I have heard from others who are in favor of a list focused on teaching. I can see the value in having two lists or narrowing the focus. > > I am unfortunately setting the constraints very high in terms of Math Forum staff time. Successful solutions will have to involve equal or less time than deleting subscribers who violate group standards. > > I imagine your solution involves more than that in order to determine which discussion a post should go in, moving it to another discussion, and also handling abuse. This is complicated by the fact that some participate via a mailing list, rather than through our web-based discussion software. > > I don't want to bother the list with procedural or technical discussions so feel free to continue to discuss the details with me in private and I will summarize as needed. > > steve@youcanguesstherest > Steve,
Thank you for bringing some attention to this list, originally titled nctm-l and meant as discussion of the "NCTM Standards". This was once a vibrant list, and I think it can be again. Many moderated lists are openly hostile to those of us who have not bought into the NCTM vision, and one reason some of us stay despite the abuse we have received is the unmoderated nature allows our voices to be heard.
Deleting subscribers who violate the reasonable standards of the Mathforum and Drexel is a justifiable action that should not take much administrative time, especially if posting via the web is not supported.