Re: QB Mailing List Temporarily Down

etchuck · Thu, 13 Apr 2000 10:29:01 -0700

Shawn Pickrell writes: << Tom, your
concerns have some validity; however, I trust R. and the
rest of the NAQT world to remain impartial. I believe
that I speak for a majority of the circuit in saying
this. >>

I concur, and I'm sure that the
actions of R and NAQT would be as fair as possible.
That's not my issue (see previous reply to John Nam),
but the perception that NAQT has that dominant an
influence over QB and HS-QB is a problem for potential
conflict of interest.

Taking a different
perspective (being from the scientific side), I have observed
the importance of declaring and eliminating as much
as possible any perceived conflicts of interest when
it comes to industry-sponsored scientific research.
The people who are in charge of the research or who
fund the research are well-established fully respected
scientists, yet they STILL have to do a declaration of
conflict of interest, and they still have to minimize any
appearance of influence. It's not meant to impugn the
character of the company, the researchers, or the
institutions that support the science... it's just meant as a
protection to assure everyone that there is no influence. If
it ever comes to a point where a conflict of
interest winds up being discovered when it wasn't
declared... that's where people wonder, "why didn't you stop
it?" And that's where character is impugned, and where
I wouldn't want NAQT (or any scientist or research
institution) to be exposed to that possibility.

I also
disagree with your view that hosting the list at Iowa
State could be seen as favoring the Iowa State program.
It did. Imagine if the mailing list were centered
_at_... (George Mason University)... what would be the
advantage? Well, the only major advantage, albeit marginal
and perhaps arguable, is the publicity that there is
a group at Iowa State that does quiz bowl. To most
of us, this is superseded by the fact that Iowa
State is an educational non-profit entity that doesn't
specialize in catering to the quiz bowl community.
Regardless, having the mailing lists _at_... for
whatever secondary benefits to the QB team at Iowa State
or for recognition of R's work in moderating the
group wasn't a big problem for me.

If longevity
is a concern, I am sure there are other internet
companies that specialize in establishing and maintaining
mailing lists similar to the universities'
majordomo/mailing list programs. I do not know what is involved,
but I am sure that those exist.

Regarding the
question of access to personal email being easier than
that of Yahoo!, I cannot disagree that we could do
better, though I also know that computer networks will
crash on occasion. I don't get to read emails if my pop
server goes down, and in fact, I don't use my work email
because messages don't get delivered to me literally for
DAYS. If it's a matter of preference for getting
announcements by email rather than here, I can understand that.
I'm just saying that it might do us more good to take
advantage of what we can do here on Yahoo (with the
calendar, with "news", with links) than to stay
antiquated.

Besides, I'd rather have this message board fill up than
exceed my mailbox quota.