Subject: Re: moderation (was Re: Nagging Naggum)
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2002 12:01:33 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* Louis Theran <>
| It would also preclude many posts from a number of popular participants
| under any sane moderation scheme.  Why have a moderated group if it admits
| discussion of the GPL and posts with 10 lines of lisp content and 90
| covering something else entirely?

  Moderation is used to keep people in moderate touch with reality.  We
  have already seen that some people think this newsgroup is _about_ their
  personal feelings for other people as such, but that is not the case.
  E.g., you would never see articles by Janos Blazi or Israel Ray Thomas or
  Jean-François Brouillet were this a moderated forum.  Good moderation
  does not keep the flames out -- it keeps the _irritants_ out so there is
  no need for flames.

| Of the three topics you mention, one would be wildly off-topic if the
| charter were similar to comp.lang.c.moderated.

  There should be no danger of that.  Few moderated newsgroups are alike,
  just as few newsgroups are alike.

| Killfiles are easier to implement and require no discussion.

  What is the point with the perfect killfile if you cannot tell anyone?