Sean Gibbins:
> Damian Brasher wrote:
>> I would like to see the list better moderated and the rule if 25:50:25
>> implemented - that is an understanding that 25% of people will disagree
>> with you, 50% will be ambivalent and 25% are with you, if you get the
>> picture. No I am not a manager nor do I want to be one!
>
> Hi Damian,
>
> From what little I know of her, Jacqui strikes me as being able to look
> after herself, or at least raise the matter with the list moderators if
> she feels aggrieved.
This is something I said in the previous post:
"That I see in this exchange is a member, who is probably quite able to
stand up for herself,"
> And, since the statement in question is not
> offensive in the broader sense, I would suggest the rest of us leave it
> for the people directly involved to settle between themselves and the
> list moderators if necessary.
>
> The list as we know it is the result of what emerged from an attempt to
> censor both content and subscribers. It was decided at that time that it
> would be neither censored nor split to accommodate individual ideas of
> the shape it should take. If you wish to alter that I would suggest that
> you campaign for it between now and the next AGM, when we can all take a
> vote on any proposed changes.
>
This feels badly thought out and asking for trouble - I was not around to
comment and have explained why. I will listen to what you have said and
aim for the next AGM. The fact that the list has been highly unmoderated
by design is a bit of a shock! This explains a lot and also explains why I
feel disappointed with the list moderators, Ian and Alan, who seem to be
doing nothing which has led me to distrust them. Why why why did the
committee think it a reasonable decision to have so little pro-active
moderation????
Dumbfounded!
--
Damian Brasher
www.diap.org.uk "Aiming to protect mission critical data: 'You can't afford
to lose...'"
All mail scanned by clam-av
http://www.clamav.net/
