[PLUG] The list needs moderation...

Michael C. Robinson michael at robinson-west.com
Sat Nov 29 03:09:01 UTC 2003


On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 17:16, Mark wrote:
> Michael C. Robinson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 14:07, Michael Rasmussen wrote:
> >
> >>I would disagree that you are not part of the problem.  Your seeming 
> >>inability to read text without injecting non-existent meaning and 
> >>disposition to enter long, wandering messages does go off topic. 
> > 
> > 
> > Hostile sound byte offering no path to compromise or truce.
> > This is not a community approach, it's not even a fair one.
> 
> Phew.  I'm just going to suggest that Michael Rasmussen's ideas be 
> followed.  It's easy and puts the control into the user's hands!
> Self control is also a handy skill to learn.
> 
> -Mark

It says instead of coming together as a community and having the
opportunity to work things out so that the largest number of people
can work together affectively, excuses that that only leads to 
fighting will reign instead.  Instead of kill filing it would be
refreshing to hear someone else for once argue for a more diplomatic
approach.  If there is no will to build community, why is this
called the Portland Linux/Unix group anyways?  I simply don't buy
it that a committee would only fight.  I also don't buy the idea
that it's impossible to have a vote through this list in order to
set reasonable moderator standards.  As far as discrimination,
discrimination along with plain old anger right now is rampant.  
This is one of the reasons why so many people defend themselves.  
To a large extent, this is feeding into off topic threads.  
Because people are told to moderate themselves, it makes sense 
to debate whether or not moderation should happen to the list 
itself.

Kill filing does not offer any way to make amends nor any way
to say, "hey any out there listening to Jeme, I don't agree 
with his off topic post showing up on here."  Do I want to be
associated with this list?  Not if Jeme's message and other
messages I don't agree with fill it up with no one moderating
for those who are vulnerable.  It's a warped view of the world
that's being created which itself arguably gives the list a 
bad reputation.  How does much of what gets on here fits in 
with helping people use Linux?  I don't agree with this ultra 
liberal view that a community should not take responsibility 
to keep a discussion list it hosts within it's mission 
statement.  Especially considering the nature of much of the 
off topic stuff that is hitting plug now,the last point takes
on a real urgency.  Libraries have standards of conduct for
patrons, is this such an alien concept?

-- 
-----------------------------
Michael C. Robinson

Associates of General Studies 
PCC March 2003.
-----------------------------




More information about the PLUG mailing list