[NTLUG:Discuss] NTLUG Discuss Guidelines

[Richard Cobbe]

Lo, on Saturday, 25 March, 2000, Steve Baker did write:

> Hence, instead of censoring people (which is A Bad Thing IMHO), we are
> essentially using the power of the moderator to classify those things
> that most people will want to read versus those that (probably) nobody
> but the author cares about. No post - however unsuitable - would ever
> go to /dev/null.

I don't know that the list, as currently set up, can handle this sort of
classification; it's really a one-channel distribution medium.  There are
solutions; probably the simplest is to create a second, unmoderated mailing
list.

This is similar to what the Babylon-5 folks did some time ago;
rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5 eventually "begat"
rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated.  You want total freedom?  Go for the
unmoderated group.  However, the show's creator and chief writer only
participates in the moderated one.  (Well, ``participated,'' really, but
that's beside the point.)

> Also, the power of the moderator to intervene should be used exceedingly
> sparingly.  I've been somewhat horrified at the degree of 'wrist slapping'
> thats been going on over the past few weeks (at least three such slaps
> administered so far).  If those complaints were translated into cancelled
> posts, I'd certainly not be a happy camper.

I'd have to agree, although perhaps ``horrified'' is too strong a word for
me.  After further reflection, I'm inclined to let stuff go on more or less
as it always has, with a minimum of control.  As another poster pointed
out, most of these problems take care of themselves without too much
difficulty.
 
> I've posted a long (and hopefully constructive) list of suggestions to
> our erstwhile moderator - as requested, I won't repeat them here.

I'm kinda curious -- could you forward those along to me as well?

Richard