Re: Moderation?

[cust_ts@cc.Helsinki.FI (Tero Sand)]

In article <42l8ln$k8f@crl6.crl.com>, Joe Kohn <joko@crl.com> wrote:
>A few years ago, I brought up the subject of moderation of csa2. At the 
>time, everyone basically said, "We don't need no steeenkin' moderation."

We still don't.

>In retrospect, we really didn't need a moderated group then, and for the 
>most part, we have all gotten along well.
>
>I think things have changed in the past few weeks. The signal to noise 
>ratio has changed drastically, 

It's an "up and down" thing. Some times there's heated debates, some
times flames, sometimes it's pretty calm.

>and most of the time I can't figure out if 
>this is comp.sys.apple2.flames or an insane asylum.

Really, you should read more usenet groups, if only for perspective. Try
talk.origins, for example.

>Before this group totally dissapates into an all out flame war, what do 
>you think of the idea of moderation? 

No. Things will calm down, eventually.

>If that concept goes over like a lead balloon, how does a group composed 
>of thousands of people deal with one disruptive individual? 
>
>What other options are there besides kill files and letters to sysadmins?

Kill files yes, mails to sysadmins -- argh. The latter should be used
only when somebody does something illegal, or engages in email
harassment, or posts deliberately to inappropriate newsgroups inspite of
pleads to stop. Strong language, even foul language, is not a reason.
-- 
Tero Sand, 2 kyu (4k*)		! "We have become... the stewards of life's
				! continuity on Earth. We did not ask for this
EMail: cust_ts@cc.helsinki.fi	! role, but we cannot abjure it. We may not be
       custts@cc.helsinki.fi	! suited for it, but here we are." -S.J. Gould