TL;DR: There are no clear Society-wide policies regarding mailing lists; I’ve made a recommendation that they should be covered by the Society Social Media Policies.
Update: It took a steady drumbeat of a dozen email messages spread out over most of a year, but in the end a version of this policy interpretation was proposed and approved at the October 2024 quarterly Board meeting.
Electronic mail has been around for my entire lifetime (give or take a couple of weeks) and is so pervasive that it fades into the background, ceding attention to the showy titans of social media that have emerged over the last two decades. But if the historical sequence were reversed, and email was introduced today, we’d likely see it as a natural evolution of that ecosystem — another social media platform.
Or at least that’s how it seems to me, which is why in discussions of SCA policy I’ve always assumed that the Society guidelines for social media — about offensive content, or copyright, or a dozen other topics — also applied to email.
But I’ve been in a couple of conversations where other people seemed surprised that I would draw that parallel, and the Society’s governing documents and policy handbooks are nearly silent on the subject of email and mailing lists — they are not explicitly designated as part of the Web Minister’s Office, or the Social Media Office, or any other portion of the Society’s overlapping matrix of responsibilities.
In practice, responsibility for mailing lists has usually been taken up by the web ministry, which for many years was the only “technology” office in the Society, but the details of this are inconsistent and vary from kingdom to kingdom.
More recently, as the Society’s office of social media has been established and determined the scope of its influence, it published a definition of social media that clearly encompassed mailing lists: “conversation supported by online tools.” (This definition appears in the Social Media Policy and in the Social Media Handbook, both published in 2021.)
I recently inquired as to whether mailing lists were covered by the social media policies, and was told that they were not a concern of the social media office… but on repeated questioning, the exact boundary of this exception were very hard to pin down, and in the end the Society Social Media Officer and Society Web Minister agreed to review the question and determine a path forward.
I’ve articulated a policy approach that I think makes sense — in short, mailing lists are a type of social media, and are governed by the social media policy, but in some cases are operated by the webministry rather than the social media office — and hope that they consider adopting that recommendation.
Correspondence attached below for the curious.
From: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
To: East Kingdom Social Media Officer
Cc: Society Social Media Officer
Date: December 15, 2023
Hello,
I was reviewing the list of platforms covered by the Social Media Handbook and noticed that it did not explicitly include email discussion mailing lists, such as the email lists operated by many local branches for conversations among their populace.
Mailing lists clearly do fall under the definition of social media provided by the handbook — “conversation supported by online tools” — so I was wondering whether this was an accidental oversight or there was some specific carve-out that caused mailing lists to be grouped in some other category.
Should we assume that mailing lists are a type of social media channel, and subject to the policies laid out in the handbook?
Or if not, is there some other set of guidelines that govern them?
Thank you!
— Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
From: Society Social Media Officer
To: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
Cc: East Kingdom Social Media Officer
Date: December 15, 2023
Mailing list remain under the domain of the Web Ministers
Thanks
Brigid
From: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
To: Society Social Media Officer
Cc: East Kingdom Social Media Officer
Date: December 15, 2023
That’s fascinating — is there a policy document which lays this out, or explains why a Google Group is different than a Discord channel?
When considering other platforms for “conversation supported by online tools,” how do we know whether they are covered by the Social Media Handbook or not? (For example, which category do other discussion platforms such as Discourse or bbPress fall into?)
The definition of the web ministry in Corpora only covers websites and web publishing, and while the Society Web Ministers Handbook does state that in some kingdoms the web ministry also “provides” mailing lists, it does not set out any policies regarding moderation of discussions on those lists.
Separate from the question of which office is responsible for setting up and administering mailing lists, would I be correct in thinking that the expectations and guidelines laid out in the Social Media Policy document are applicable to mailing lists?
Thanks so much for helping to clear up this confusion!
— Mathghamhain
From: Society Social Media Officer
To: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
Cc: East Kingdom Social Media Officer
Date: December 15, 2023
Approved platforms are listed in the handbook
Some kingdoms are currently running trials with the approval of my office on additional platforms.
From: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
To: Society Social Media Officer
Cc: East Kingdom Social Media Officer
Date: December 15, 2023
Yes, I am familiar with the handbook, but the question I am asking is how we should determine whether something is considered social media and would require the approval of your office.
For example, if someone wanted to set up online conversation forum using Google Groups or Discourse or Groups.io or bbPress, should they contact your office for approval of a social media platform?
Because these are all “conversation supported by online tools” I had assumed that the policies of the Handbook would apply, but it sounds like there is an exception and I would like to understand it.
Does it fall under the webministry if we enable discussion by email, but under the social media office if we enable discussion on the web?
Do the offices split responsibility for platforms that support both?
Thanks!
— Mathghamhain
From: Society Social Media Officer
To: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
Cc: East Kingdom Social Media Officer
Date: December 15, 2023
I would email my office having already obtained the approval of your ksmo and Kingdom Seneschal that such a trial would be supported.
As a courtesy, I’d also include your web minister
From: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
To: Society Social Media Officer
Cc: East Kingdom Social Media Officer
Date: December 15, 2023
I’m confused — does this mean that mailing lists run through Google Groups are governed by the Social Media Handbook?
Does it fall under the webministry if we enable discussion by email, but under the social media office if we enable discussion on the web?
— Mathghamhain
From: Society Social Media Officer
To: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
Cc: East Kingdom Social Media Officer
Date: December 15, 2023
Hi Nic and I are putting our heads together and will come back to you with clarity hopefully prior to Christmas
From: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
To: Society Social Media Officer
Cc: East Kingdom Social Media Officer
Date: December 15, 2023
Thanks so much — and my apologies for creating a hassle by raising questions about these weird edge cases!
For what it’s worth, I think there is an easy solution here, and I would suggest the following approach:
- Agree that electronic mailing lists are a type of social media, because they meet the definition in the handbook, and they are used for the same purposes as several of our other social media platforms.
- Declare that rules about offensive content and moderation of problematic discussions found in the Social Media Policy and Social Media Handbook also apply to conversations on mailing lists.
- Confirm that the same rules apply regardless of whether online discussions are hosted on SCA-administered Internet servers or use third-party services; and regardless of whether they are email-only or also support web-based or app-based interfaces.
- Recognize that in some kingdoms, for many years the web ministry has administered some or all mailing lists (as well as a very small number of web-based comment boards), and continue to delegate the responsibility for those discussions to that office — but have the social media office retain oversight of online discussion platforms in areas where this arrangement is not in effect.
This approach seems optimal to me because:
- It’s fair and consistent from the perspective of the membership — the same rules apply when posting to my province’s mailing list as they do when posting to its Facebook group or Discord channel.
- It ensures that the webministry has policy grounds for moderating offensive content on mailing lists without requiring them to write a new handbook about what is or is not allowed.
- It doesn’t create any new obligations for either the web ministry or the social media office, and it leaves responsibility for all existing resources where they are today.
I hope this suggestion is of use to you, and look forward to hearing how you resolve this question.
— Mathghamhain
From: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
To: Society Social Media Officer
Cc: Society Webminister
Date: January 30, 2024
Hello!
I half-heard a mention during the Board call of a policy interpretation on this subject, but an interruption prevented me from following all of the details.
Is there a written summary of the new guidelines somewhere I can reference without waiting a month or longer for the official minutes to emerge?
Thanks again for digging into these details — I really appreciate it!
— Mathghamhain
From: Society Social Media Officer
To: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
Cc: Society Webminister
Date: January 30, 2024
Nicholas and I will be putting out formal guidelines later in the week. There are a LOT of announcements this week so our thanks for your patience
From: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
To: Society Social Media Officer
Cc: Society Webminister
Date: March 5, 2024
Hello — I’m not sure if this got delayed, or if it went out and I missed it… Where I should be looking for these kinds of announcements?
Thanks,
— Mathghamhain
From: Society Webminister
To: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
Cc: Society Social Media Officer
Date: March 6, 2024
Sorry we’ve both been bogged down with some real life things. With any luck, Brigid and I will be able to get this taken care of after Gulf Wars.
From: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
To: Society Webminister
Cc: Society Social Media Officer
Date: March 6, 2024
No rush, that’s totally reasonable — I just got worried that it might have gone out somewhere that I had missed.
Enjoy the war!
— Mathghamhain
From: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
To: Society Social Media Officer, Society Webminister
Date: March 11, 2024
I know you’re likely off at war, but I’m following up because I saw a description of this guidance in the President’s report from the last Board meeting:
Motion … to uphold the joint policy interpretation by the Society Webminister and the Society Communications and Social Media Officer, that while technical management of email lists remain under the Web Ministry, expected behaviors of people using them are consistent with Social Media expectations and the enforcement of contraventions of those behaviors remains with the Office of the Seneschal.
I wanted to make sure that you folks were aware that the responsibility for management of email lists is not handled the same way throughout the known world.
Because Corpora is silent on the subject of mailing list administration, and because email is not included in the explicitly-assigned responsibilities of the webministry, various kingdoms have chosen different approaches to this question.
There are indeed kingdoms in which all mailing lists are managed by the webministry, but other kingdoms have decided they should be managed by a deputy to the seneschal, or by the individual officer and branches they’re associated with, or other alternative arrangements.
A policy that requires the webministry in every kingdom to assume responsibility for management of mailing lists will likely result in a fair amount of disruption.
This is why my suggestion was that no changes should be made to the existing administration responsibilities for mailing lists, other than to clarify that the guidelines of the Social Media Policy also apply in these forums.
Perhaps you already have this distinction in mind and its nuances simply aren’t reflected in the President’s report, in which case please forgive the redundancy of this email.
In service,
— Mathghamhain
From: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
To: Society Social Media Officer, Society Webminister
Date: April 18, 2024
To put this in more concrete terms, I reached out to a cross-section of kingdoms and asked which office in their kingdom was responsible for technical management of their mailing lists.
Of the nine kingdoms for which I have data:
- In three of those kingdoms, the webministry is exclusively responsible for administering mailing lists.
- In two more, the webministry is responsible for “most” mailing lists, with a smaller number being administered directly by other offices.
- In two kingdoms, it’s widely varied, with each office, branch, and guild making their own choices as to whether mailing lists are administered by the seneschal, webminister, chronicler, or another local role.
- And in one kingdom, all mailing lists are administered by an officer who reports to the seneschal rather than the webminister.
I hope this information is useful to you.
— Mathghamhain
From: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
To: Society Social Media Officer, Society Webminister
Date: June 26, 2024
Hello,
Did you folks ever figure out how to articulate the details of this policy?
Thanks!
— Mathghamhain
From: Mathghamhain Ua Ruadháin
To: Society Social Media Officer, Society Webminister
Date: October 6, 2024
Hello,
Some more time has passed so I am checking in to see if a written policy was ever issued on this subject.
My apologies if this was all cleared up somewhere and I just missed it… thanks!
— Mathghamhain
From: Society Social Media Officer
To: Mathghamhain Ua RuadháinCC: Society Webminister
Date: October 6, 2024
Hi,
this will go up to the Board as an interpretation this meeting for approval with some minor modifications
Excerpted from the October 2024 President’s Report:
Conduct Requirements For Email Conduct Meeting Expectations For Social Media.
Motion by Pug Bainter to uphold the policy interpretation of the Society Communications and Social Media Officer that conduct requirements for email conduct are consistent with the expectations for social media and that behavioural issues should be reported to the Office of the Seneschal for management if required. Second by K.T. Sheppard. Opposed: None. Motion carried.
The discussion is recorded in the video from the October 2024 quarterly Board meeting.