The future of the list?

[davemarc]

List moderation is obviously at the discretion of the moderator.  I've seen
one instance of list moderation; here's how it worked:

It was on a list devoted to Author X; over the weeks I lurked, the
discussion was not as intense and wide-ranging as it is on the p-list.  The
welcome mat had explicitly stated what the subject was, and warned that
off-topic subjects might be kept off-list.  When an off-topic subject
actually came up, the moderator let a couple of posts appear, then posted a
warning.  There was a little bit of (polite) debate, and then the off-topic
subject seemed to go away.  I don't know if any message was blocked; the
whole thing might have occurred with the warning alone.

I'd *prefer* an unmoderated list (and this may be a non-issue if the
current operators have no interest in becoming moderators), but I am not
against experimenting with moderation.  I am definitely in favor of
intelligent, witty, and creative posts, posts that are challenging to our
intellects--not to our collective patience and standards of tolerance.  

So regardless of the outcome of the moderator debate, I encourage
participants who want the quality of discussion to rise to put some effort
into keeping the posts lively, and keeping the lively posts coming.  We've
all seen a lot of examples of how "lively" things get through insults, but
not enough examples of thought-provoking (as opposed to simply provocative)
exchanges.

Let's see just how gifted we are.  If enough participants contribute posts
that are funny, flirtatious, rhyming, brilliant, etc., the atmosphere on
the p-list will improve accordingly.  Write the kind of posts you'd like to
read, the kind you'd like to see in your mailbox.  

And I hope that those who have been told to shut up, control themselves,
etc., will re-assess how they've been using this list.  Anyone with an
appreciation of the fact that this list has been unmoderated for years
despite the flame wars and complaints and departures of worthy, despairing
contributors should be able to respect the fact that many of the criticisms
have come from participants with a preference for persuasion through
reason, a reluctance to resort to censorship of any kind, and no particular
axes to grind.

d