Re: Let's talk moderation

[Erikus4@aol.com]

> Possible criteria for posting *might be* no personal attacks

Not too difficult.  (You mean on each other, right?)

>only two posts per day; and some limits on length.

For the love of god, No!  Don't limit the speakers because the listeners are 
damn lazy.  Good ideas shouldn't be limited by number or length.  Almost all 
good things are subject to abuse - the answer isn't to limit or eliminate the 
good thing, but to ignore the bad.

I seem to recall a saying, "There's one in every crowd."  It's just as 
applicable to a listserv.  Ignore the yahoos.

My apprehension at having a moderator is based on the very diverse opinions 
that appear on Vision.  I can certainly imagine a moderator abusing his or 
her authority.  That would be VERY damaging to the list.

I've participated in many moderated lists on the Internet.  One is rec.guns.  
Obviously, the discussion is about the recreational use of guns - one 
viewpoint.  Moderation works very well.  The problem I see with Vision is 
that we don't have one viewpoint, but we discuss, in theory, what is "best" 
for Moscow.  We don't agree on what's best.  Moderation may be done 
improperly.

E. O'Daniel
IDAHO!