Re: Moderation

[wbaguhn@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Will Baguhn)]

In article <4se4qs$44r@crl2.crl.com>, Joe Kohn <joko@crl.com> wrote:
>I'm not exactly sure how to word this, but I've been on a self-imposed
>vacation from csa2 for the past several weeks. I didn't like what I saw
>before leaving, and now that I've been able to read 3 week's worth of
>messages all at once (not that I actually have read everything), I like
>what I see even less.
>
>It's as if a world wide flame war has developed, and there's no signs of
>it letting up. I, for one, find it to be very unpleasant and it makes
>csa2 a much less pleasant place to visit. Heck, it's just not fun
>anymore.
>
>I don't know about the rest of you, but I can't deal with csa2 in its
>present state of anarchy. It's as if one ego is holding all of csa2
>hostage. My suggestion will not be popular, but I think the time has come
>to have csa2 moderated. The flame fest has simply gotten too far out of
>hand.
>
>Discussion? Comments?
>
>Joe
>http://www.crl.com/~joko

No.  Moderation = Bad.  It'll slow down how fast the messages get out,
and that's about it.  One side or the other will get control of who can
post, and then they're just going to sit there.

The only thing that will "save" csa2 is a little maturity from everyone,
and a lot of "just shutting up" when it's time to just shut up.  (For the
cluefully disadvantaged, that means after three days of "yes I did!" -
'No you didn't!', NO MORE FOLLOWUPS on the thread.  just let it go.
just because you can sit there and post a load of crap for longer does
NOT mean that your position is right, and the other person's position
is wrong.)

If you don't like the flames, add them to your killfile once you realize
that they're flames, or just annoying.  It'll do wonders for your
perception of how nice things are.

-- 
                                      --- Rev. SPQR (wbaguhn@nyx.net)