[PLUG] Issues relating to the PLUG mailing lists

[Russell Senior]

>>>>> "David" == David Mandel <dmandel at pdxLinux.org> writes:

David> I do not want to start another "The list needs moderation..."
David> thread, but I do want people to know that I read much, but not
David> all, of that thread, and unless I missed something most people
David> seem to feel the list(s) should remain as they are -
David> UNMODERATED.

I went to the MWVLUG meeting in Corvallis this evening and afterwards
had a discussion of the list issues with several of those assembled.
Cooper Stevenson expressed an uneasiness about how the PLUG traffic
looks to newbies, that it might drive people away, which he didn't
want to happen.

Here's a wacky idea I had.

I made a suggestion to him for optional moderation.  That is, he
create his own mailing list that filters PLUG traffic.  Subscribers
send to (e.g.) plug-moderated and those messages get (either manually
or automatically) reposted to the main plug list, then the moderater
chooses which responses are helpful and not too scary or offensive
from plug back on to plug-moderated.

The nice thing about this arrangement is that plug remains
cooperatively anarchic as is without interruption, the folks who
thinks moderation is a good and useful idea get to offer a moderated
version and do the moderation work themselves.

In principle, subscribers could choose their own moderator:
plug-cooper-filtered, plug-michael-c-robinson-filtered, etc.

I am not sure that the software exists to do this directly, but it
doesn't look like a hard problem in principle.  One issue with mailman
would probably be the plug subscription limitation.  That is, mailman
wants list admin approval for posts from non-subscribers.  So
plug-moderated subscribers would need to be added to the approved
poster list somehow for it to work without manual intervention by the
plug list admin.

FWIW.

-- 
Russell Senior         ``I have nine fingers; you have ten.''
seniorr at aracnet.com