Re: [Hampshire] list moderation?

Damian Brasher wrote:

>> 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????

Policy changes are voted on during the AGM. Don't blame the committee -
members vote. I don't recall there every being a vote specifically on
moderation/censorship of the list, there was one about if the ML should
be public and what the public archive should contain. Personally I think
the list admins do a great job of keeping all the spam off the list and
making sure everyone who wants to can post (which is what I personally
see their jobs as).

I would not be surprised if there is a heated debate if you start
talking about censorship/moderation as it is one of those things that
people get very excited about.

Mat