Moderate the List!

[Mike Morris]

At 10:32 PM 08/09/99 -0700, Harvey A. Kader (optom at ibm.net) wrote:
>Gentleman!:

Singular?
Sorry, I think that 99.9% of the folks on this list are gentlemen.

>I think it is time for the list administrators seriously consider making
>this list a MODERATED list. This means people on the list can volunteer
>to moderate the list(we only need one person at a time). Moderate the
>list means all messages to the list are first read by a volunteer who
>then decides either to 1)send it to the rest of the list, 2)delete it in
>its entirety, or 3) modify portions of the list by deleting certain
>elements.

I really think that moderation would destroy this list.  I have
no desire to have my thoughts filtered by some mechanism that has
unknown parameters.

>Call it moderation, call it censureship, call it what you want, but it
>is the only way to stop 100% anything undesirable from reaching our
>eyes. I operate a list currently, and I moderate it. This technique
>ensures a clean running list.

That's censorship.  I've heard of moderators that killed messages with
incorrectly spelled words or incorrect grammar in them.

>Le's have a vote on this. Of the 700 or so members how many want
>moderation as a means of cleaning up and keeping this list clean?

I'd bet that you would lose that vote.

>Think about it. Moderation would solve our problems 100% - no more
>garbage to read. Sounds good!

I always get suspicious of anybody that promises a 100% cure to
any problem.  That list includes physicians, auto mechanics,
door-to-door salesmen, and especially politicians.  My dad used to
joke that his "BS alarm" just went off when he heard that kind of statement...

>Harvey A. Kader - http://www.angelfire.com/on/vacuumtubes

Harvey, your pet peeve is apparently that life isn't perfect.
I doubt if you hit every green light as you go to work every
day.  Think of the last few inappropriate messages on this
list as more than a red light - it was an inconvenient fender-
bender that's been resolved.  I've heard worse language from
teenagers in the schoolyard.  Yes, it's inappropriate for this
environment.  Let it go.  Life goes on.  Not every problem needs
to be solved with government intervention.  If you don't like a
message, use your delete key.

And besides, Dave has already nuked the guilty party.  Hopefully
the offender has not only been removed, but also blocked from
re-subscribing.

I vote NO on moderation.  We haven't had a problem up until now
(yes, we've drifted now and then, but they've been infrequent, interesting,
and instructional drifts...).  And I don't think
we now have a problem that needs fixing with that severe a solution.
(yes, the profane messages were instructional.  I learned to
killfile that person.  My mailer now deletes anything from him
before I ever see it.  Even before Dave took action).

Moderation would delay the "responsiveness" of the list.  All
messages would sit in the in-basket somewhere until the moderator
got around to reading them.  I've seen as many as 4 give-and-take
cycles on a message in one day.  A couple of moderated lists that
I've been on has been as slow as 2 cycles a week.

Changing to moderation of this list due to this incident, I feel,
is using a 10 pound sledgehammer to kill a single gnat.  Yes,
the individual gnat is annoying, but unless there are a few
hundred it's not worth doing anything about it.  Now if it were
a newsgroup with 20,000 or 30,000 subscribers, 10% of which were
gnats, it might be worth exploring.

Also moderation is just removing the personal responsibility
aspect of the situation.  Right now if I post something, what
I say is my responsibility.  If I call somebody a <expletive
deleted>, whatever happens is directly attributable to my
actions.  I don't need to have some faceless body give my words
the Good Housekeeping stamp of approval before somebody else
reads my missive.
(Note to the list admin: the above is not intended as reflecting
on you.  You've done a marvelous job.)

One of the reasons that this country is deteriorating is that
everybody says "let X take over", or "Let Y take care of this
situation) where X or Y is the government, your HMO, or
somebody else.  If you are eager to hand control of your life
away, little by little, fine.  Do so.  You can put yourself in
a invisible cage of your own making...  Sorry, that's not for
me...  Go look up Ben Franklins' comment on personal security
sometime.

And this is my last posting on this subject unless somebody
chooses to followup on this message.

One last comment in closing: if this had been a moderated list,
we would not be able to have this discussion - you see, it's
not on topic.

Mike WA6ILQ

Sponsored by the City of Tempe 

Listserver Submissions:  heath at listserv.tempe.gov
Listserver Subscription: listserv at listserv.tempe.gov - "subscribe heath 'name' 'call'"
Listserver Unsubscribe: listserv at listserv.tempe.gov - -"signoff heath"