Log in

Old and new ANZSTAT

  • 8 Feb 2021 7:37 AM
    Reply # 10068029 on 8976241
    Kevin Wang (Administrator)

    Some organisations, in recent months/years, also starts to block sending e-mails to mailing lists / listserv. So it would prevent people working in such organisations from sending e-mails. These organisations often also block access to GMail (or other web-mails), which rules out of subscribing to mailing list via GMail -- if people want to read "anzstat" posts during work hours.

  • 8 Feb 2021 7:28 AM
    Reply # 10068004 on 8976241

    Hi Chris

    There were many things wrong with the old list. Some problems were obvious, but others I had to deal with offline, even though the list was not controlled by the society. These were not minor problems. Some messages on the list caused great upset to multiple people. Some people argue "just ignore it", but that's hard when it became personal. I also had many colleagues tell me how they had left this list because of either disgust at some of the messages or just simple exasperation. 

    We did investigate a standard email list as part of our working group, but there were few options for this old technology and UQ (where the old anzstat was hosted) were looking to get rid of their service. We also tried to get the list properly moderated via someone at UQ.



  • 7 Feb 2021 5:22 PM
    Reply # 10066901 on 8976241

    Noting that this discussion was about 4 months ago, I am looking at the list of general topics and see that hardly any posts have any replies.  Sp I think the data are in: very little engagement.

    There was nothing at all wrong with the old ANZStat. The best thing was that is was just an email group so it was incredibly easy to access. I think the society should consider starting another email group. Those who do not like it can use the Forum. I will continue to check in here to see if there is anything of interest, but currently it is very anodyne.

  • 18 Sep 2020 11:11 AM
    Reply # 9244731 on 8976241

    Thanks John

    An important difference from the old ANZSTAT is that this list is monitored and messages that break the guidelines are deleted, which should reduce the harms.  

    I do know people who left the old ANZSTAT list because they found it toxic, and we all remember the swathe of "unsubscribe" messages when things got out of hand.

    I agree that those people who overstep the mark may need help, but how we facilitate that will need more thought.



  • 18 Sep 2020 7:55 AM
    Reply # 9244443 on 9241640
    Adrian Barnett wrote:

    Hi Christoph

    One important measure of success is that nobody has been vilified on this list, nor has there been any racist or sexist comments. All of which happened on the old ANZSTAT list in the last year. Regards, 


    Reducing the amount of traffic will at the same time limit what offends.  What is important is that inappropriate comment is called out.  This is surely an important part of the process by which SSAI, as a community, reins in those who overstep the mark, hopefully with effects that will carry across to other areas of their professional life.  In this respect, the old list functioned a whole lot better than another list to which many of us subscribe.

    There can be occasions when those who are judged to have overstepped the mark themselves require support.  Whatever the list mechanics, that is a difficult area to negotiate.

  • 17 Sep 2020 9:36 AM
    Reply # 9241640 on 8976241

    Hi Christoph

    One important measure of success is that nobody has been vilified on this list, nor has there been any racist or sexist comments. All of which happened on the old ANZSTAT list in the last year. Regards, 


    Last modified: 17 Sep 2020 9:36 AM | Adrian Barnett
  • 17 Sep 2020 8:23 AM
    Reply # 9241485 on 8976241
    Deleted user

    Hi Adrian,

    Would you be able to suggest any metrics from which you consider this forum to be definitely successful or a definite failure? For example, if the current level of non-engagement persists for x weeks or months, when would this be considered a failure? Meta engagement (talking about the forum itself) doesn't count :).

    For example, I clicked on the emailed update, could see the message, tried to reply but had to login again and then had to go back to the email and click on the link again, instead of just replying to the email.

    It seems that a facebook group is the usual approach taken, despite the reputation of that august institution as a facebook group is as simple to use as the original list server.

  • 17 Sep 2020 6:43 AM
    Reply # 9241248 on 8976241

    Hi Richard

    I'm more optimistic. It's still a great place for the community to find out about jobs and seminars. The chats might yet come. Meanwhile we are working in the background to improve thanks to everyone's suggestions. Regards,


  • 16 Sep 2020 10:11 AM
    Reply # 9238733 on 8976241

    I think the result is obvious. The new ANZSTAT is to put it mildly not living up to expectations. Virtually no traffic to speak of. I think its just too much bother to post or read content.


  • 2 Sep 2020 3:42 PM
    Reply # 9206335 on 9205729

    Chris Howden wrote:

    I mean, thanks Berwin. A bit clunky but I think I got it right this time. If this funcitonality hasnt been explained anywhere it might be useful to do so. It wasnt very intuitive - for me at least!

    I completely agree that it is a bit clunky.  Not sure if anybody knows how the functionality works :)  I am doing a lot of trial and error, clinking on all kind of icons to see what controls formatting, indentation, &c.

    Many interfaces like this allow you to switch from the mark-up display to what the actual HTML code is, and the latter is then sometimes easier to manipulate.

    Not sure yet whether this interface seems to promote bottom citing (yuck!) or top citing (marginal better), my cursor seems to be randomly placed at the bottom or top when I select "quote".



    Last modified: 2 Sep 2020 3:43 PM | Berwin Turlach
Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software