Chrystie at BlogJunction has this post about lists. (“List servs” may avoid trademark problems, but barely. Can’t we just call them lists?)
Quoting a central section:
Saying â€œList servs are deadâ€ is like saying â€œGod is Dead!â€ or â€œThe Author is Dead!â€ While I admit that I usually will indulge in this sort of brain candy, thereâ€™s something about this particular â€œX is dead!â€ statement that doesnâ€™t sit right with me.
Just a few weeks ago on PUBLIB, real-life librarians were talking about restroom fixtures, pc management, and breaks from the reference desk. They were also talking about censorship, Laura Bush, and disabling public chat. And the nice thing about it is that there were tons of different voices in there. Sure, it came in to my email and filtered down to a folder. Yes, itâ€™s sort of a pain. But something tells me that we need to remember, or get back somehow, to the real challenges facing librarians, especially those in small and rural areas. Sometimes it *is* more about the restroom fixtures. Whenâ€™s the last time we picked something like that off our feed? Better yet, whenâ€™s the last time we offered a public solution to that sort of problem? We need to create and use technologies that enable and value a multitude of voices, and foster collaboration between folks with varying experiences and expertise. We need to value above all else that we use these technologies to collaboratively solve real problems in real libraries.
Earlier, Chrystie expresses a surprise at the lack of reaction to Stevie C’s “lists are dead!” proclamation. I would swear that I did take Steven on at the time, but can’t locate it at the moment. Perhaps I just thought, “Well, that’s Steven M. Cohen oversimplifying for the sake of emphasis again,” or “Well, lists are dead to Steven…” Certainly, when I wrote The Dangling Conversation, I worked on the assumption that lists were and are far from dead.
By the way, when you’re at BlogJunction, go back to yesterday’s posts about real libraries and virtual services. As one who’s been saying “And, not or” for more than a decade now, I can’t help but agree. (Wouldn’t it be nice if folks like, say, Barbara Quint recognized that, at least for public and academic libraries, real librarians working in actual physical libraries with real collections continue to be important for their “placeness” as well as for the, ahem, “information” locked up in those collections?)