The future of the list?

[Jay Herzog]

	If moderation would take the form that davemarc describes below
	I would definitely be against it. I think it would stifle debate
	and discussion and generally make the list very dull indeed.
	Though I've been on the list less than a year, In that time I've
	seen an ebb and flow of signal to noise ratio (of course one
	person's noise is another's signal). I agree that the petty,
	ad hominem attacks have proliferated as of late and that everyone
	needs to take a step back and reconsider why they're on the list 
	to start with...I for one would miss the eclectic range of topics
	and subtopics that might disappear with moderator(s).
			Hoping we remain unencumbered,
							Jay
								

On Sat, 19 Jul 1997, davemarc wrote:

> 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.