Moderation

[Roy and/or Janet Miller <millers@inetnebr.com>]

Celt wrote:

That's the real question, isn't it?  Most likely, those who involve
themselves in these threads would be most interested, and probably
would be least biased in moderation.  Posts from Turley, Rubywand, et
al, would be immediately killed by any moderator from the "vogon"
camp, and those from Roy, Joe Kohn and company would probably be
killed by any "turlette" moderator, whether or not they were technical
in nature, whether or not they were "politically motivated".  Those
most qualified, the regulars who don't involve themselves in the
flame-wars, name-calling and insult-trading would be least interested
in moderation duties.  At least that's the impression I've got, after
reading csa2 for years.

Anyone have any ideas on how we could moderate a group like that?

Celt

Assuming that you can moderate on the newsgroups (I really don't know if
that can be done) it really is easy, 1) All posts have to have some
bearing on the Apple II; 2) No personal attacks will be tolerated. So
elevated discussion and disagreement would be allowed, but name calling
and slanders or slurs would result in the post vanishing. It wouldn't be
easy on the moderator. I know. I had to moderate a nasty ecclesiastical
war in my presbytery. And though I was on one side, once in the
moderator's chair I could no longer think that way, I had to be as
neutral as I could be. It was exhausting. I don't envy whomever would
get the job of moderating this group.

Roy