Re: Let's talk moderation

["bill london" <bill_london@hotmail.com>]

While the concept of a V2020 list moderator is a tempting one (who doesn't 
want someone to screen out all the noisy and demented postings  of life?), I 
still like the idea of an unmoderated list.  For two primary reasons:
1. legal issues....As I understand it, what V2020 is now doing is analagous 
to placing the soap box in London's Hyde Park.  V2020 is only supplying the 
podium, and is not responsible for the message.  If V2020 in any way 
selects, or censors, or moderates the messages, then I understand that V2020 
(whatever that is) becomes legally responsible.  And can be sued for libel, 
etc.
2. not me...if the list is to be moderated, who will do it?

I fully agree with Priscilla that some of the messages on this list recently 
"should" not have appeared.  but it is just not a tidy world.  And I think 
we have seen that when the subscribers let those who sent the offending post 
know of their concerns, the problem resolves itself.  Naive, perhaps, but I 
still have faith that we can deal with these problems by airing them, not 
censoring them.
BL


>From: "Priscilla Salant" <psalant@moscow.com>
>To: <vision2020@moscow.com>
>Subject: Let's talk moderation
>Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 21:03:57 -0800
>
>Visionaries,
>
>About two years ago, a series of possibly libelous statements on this
>listserv prompted calls for an official moderator.  His or her job would be
>to act as a gatekeeper for all posts on the list.  It was suggested that
>members of the 2020 steering committee would screen each and every post
>according to some mutually acceptable criteria.
>
>At the time, I argued strongly against the idea.  I wanted no part in
>deciding which were "appropriate" posts suitable for everyone's
>consumption.
>
>Now I'm no longer so certain.  I have found many recent posts to be rude,
>petty, rambling, and today, clearly inappropriate.  The one today from
>someone using Timothy Egan's name (or so it appears) definitely crossed the
>line for me.
>
>While I still don't like the idea of there being an all-judge of what's ok
>to post, I think the list has gotten out of control.  I'm ready to talk
>moderation again.  Possible criteria for posting *might be* no personal
>attacks; only two posts per day; and some limits on length.
>
>What do others think?  And please, no personal attacks on this one, folks
>.. let's just talk about whether moderation is or is not worth pursuing.
>
>--Priscilla Salant
>

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com