134 LANGUAGE AND THE INTERNET
‘metadiscussions’ about the role of the moderator are common-
place. In all cases, moderators belong to individual groups within
a system. There is no ‘super-moderator’ for a chatgroup system as
a whole, and no ‘big brother’ watching – benevolently or malevo-
lently – over the whole Internet chatgroup system, notwithstanding
popular suspicions to the contrary.
Many servers can circulate a message very quickly, within a
minute or so; it would be unusual for a delay to exceed half an
hour, though as always this depends on such factors as the com-
puter system used and the part of the world to which the message
is sent (cf. p. 31). Because messages can arrive at any time, and
users may not want to read them as they come in, some systems
(e.g. LISTSERV) provide a digest of all messages received during
a particular period of time, which can be accessed in one go at
a later stage. An inde xof the messages received in a period may
also be available, which users can scan before deciding which ones
to read. Additional files may be stored for access by group mem-
bers, such as minutes of meetings, magazine articles, agendas, and
academic papers. However, it is important to bear in mind that
some mail systems do not accept very large messages or message
digests (e.g. larger than 64kB or 100kB). Technologically imposed
length constraints are an important factor influencing the linguis-
tic character of chatgroup messages, therefore, over and above the
pragmatic pressure on individuals to keep their contributions rela-
tively short. Chatgroups are unlikely to be a domain where lengthy
monologues or balanced dialogues – speeches, lectures, commer-
cial presentations, formal debates, and suchlike – are found. Or,
putting this another way, it would be pointless for anyone to try to
use in this way a medium which is designed to provoke and accept
short messages and multiple reactions. The point may be obvious,
but it is nevertheless a distinctive linguistic feature of the chatgroup
situation.
The asynchronous nature of the interaction is the heart of the
matter. Individual contributions to a group are saved and dis-
tributed as they come in, which may be at any time and separated by
any period of time. In one group I observed, several contributions