Re: Bye
Date: 29 May 2006 20:50:11 -0700
Message-ID: <1148961011.138461.164230_at_y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
Marshall wrote:
> I have on occasion imagined that we could split the group,
> and have comp.databases.theory.polite and
> comp.database.theory.rude. Ha ha! Of course, the rude
> people would get big laughs out of behaving rudely in the
> polite group, and laugh endlessly about our inability to
> keep them out. Again, the lack of sanctions is key. In a
> very real sense, *all* newsgroups end in ".polite" and all
> the rude people ignore that fact. Contempt for the
> standards of civil behaviour is the very definition of
> rudeness.
>
> What if we did have sanctions? What if we could set some
> standards, publish them, and exclude people who didn't
> meet the standards? What standards would we set? How would
> we decide what is allowed? Trying to actually come up
> with a set of rules that would work made me realize just
> how problematic this is.
Marshall, this concept is nothing new. It's called
"moderation". (I don't mean the bs "automatic" moderation
that some groups have.) And if you have a group of competent
thorough moderators that enforce the rules then moderation
can work very well. No sanctions are involved other than
your post not getting posted. Only trouble is, it takes a
lot of work and it's often hard to find and maintain a group
of moderators large enough to handle the traffic while still
keeping quality high. And of course the postings are
delayed.
Anyhow, comp.database.theory.moderated is one solution and
it's not a new concept.
PS. mAsterdam, I didn't quite understand who/what offended
you since you quoted both BB and I. If I offended you it was