5044  To moderate or not to moderate... be aware of Miles

Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:16:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Amaury de Siqueira <amaurycdsf@yahoo.com>
Subject: [Tango-L] To moderate or not to moderate... be aware of Miles
argument
To: tango-l@mit.edu

My first experience with list moderation date as far
back as 1993-4 with the
KMUG (Kansai Mac Users Group) list. At the end of the
day moderation was as
detrimental to the list as non-moderation.

One of the rationales behind list moderation is
sustenance of an online
community. Implicit in this argument is the idea that
constant disruption
and flame war is likely to push certain members to
leave the community thus
eroding the quality of membership and content of
postings.

The bottom line for me is the 'age' of a list. That
is, an old established
list with strong membership and displaying high
quality posting may not be
susceptible to the eroding effects of flame and
disruption. It seems to me
that this list's quality FAR exceed the once in a
while virulent posting of
some listeras. ;)

Some flames evolve into rich discussion and edifying
exchanges. Nina's
abhorrent posting is a good case in point. I learned
as a result of an
initial nonsensical posting - (thank you to
Konstantin, Huck, and all
others)

A censored list may strip the list of its richness of
expression. Granted
we should all try to display certain level of
civility. However, I must
say that the entertainment value of some postings
bring a smile to my face.
That alone makes it all worthwhile.

Cheers,
Amaury



-----Original Message-----

Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:28:11 -0600
From: Nina Pesochinsky <nina@earthnet.net>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] To moderate or not to moderate... be aware of
Miles argument
To: tango-l@mit.edu

Amaury,

On the tango lists, there are only two choices - you either die or be
killed, or grow thick skin. Welcome to the list1

Nina






At 02:16 PM 7/18/2007, Amaury de Siqueira wrote:

>My first experience with list moderation date as far
>back as 1993-4 with the
>KMUG (Kansai Mac Users Group) list. At the end of the
>day moderation was as
>detrimental to the list as non-moderation.
>
>One of the rationales behind list moderation is
>sustenance of an online
>community. Implicit in this argument is the idea that
>constant disruption
>and flame war is likely to push certain members to
>leave the community thus
>eroding the quality of membership and content of
>postings.
>
>The bottom line for me is the 'age' of a list. That
>is, an old established
>list with strong membership and displaying high
>quality posting may not be
>susceptible to the eroding effects of flame and
>disruption. It seems to me
>that this list's quality FAR exceed the once in a
>while virulent posting of
>some listeras. ;)
>
>Some flames evolve into rich discussion and edifying
>exchanges. Nina's
>abhorrent posting is a good case in point. I learned
>as a result of an
>initial nonsensical posting - (thank you to
>Konstantin, Huck, and all
>others)
>
>A censored list may strip the list of its richness of
>expression. Granted
>we should all try to display certain level of
>civility. However, I must
>say that the entertainment value of some postings
>bring a smile to my face.
>That alone makes it all worthwhile.
>
>Cheers,
>Amaury
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: tango-l-bounces@mit.edu
>[mailto:tango-l-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf Of
>m i l e s
>Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 3:11 PM
>To: tango-l@mit.edu
>Subject: [Tango-L] A Cautionary Phrase (was:
>Acrimoniousness)
>
>Hi,
>
>After reading everyones responses my post about
>Acrimoniousness...
>
>"You can tell a fool he's doing a foolish thing, it
>may not change
>anything, but at least the truth is where it needs to
>be". - Kosh,
>Vorlon Ambassador, Babylon 5.
>
>Oh and one thing about list moderation, the list
>moderator in my
>estimation in question isn't doing a good job of list
>moderation if
>they're acting like that. A good list moderator,
>shepherds the
>conversation and doesn't stifle it! That's a rare
>skill and not
>everyone is cut out for it, so its wise when starting
>a list to pick
>someone ELSE other than yourself to moderate a list.
>
>Lastly, I find it interesting that you folks took the
>better portion
>of my note and discarded it in favor of focusing on
>the one thing
>that was an after thought, the list moderation. As a
>friend of mine
>once said, "People are gonna do what they're gonna do,
>and you can't
>change that. But you can influence them by how you
>carry yourself."
>
>M i l e s.
>
>
>
>
>Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.

Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:35:07 +0100
From: "'Mash" <mashdot@toshine.net>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] To moderate or not to moderate... be aware of
Miles argument
To: "[Tango-L]" <tango-l@mit.edu>


I look forward to the day that we can use "flame wars" as a sustainable energy source.

'Mash
London,UK

"May we be cautious in our perfection lest we lose the ability to dance."


On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 02:28:11PM -0600, Nina Pesochinsky wrote:

> Amaury,
>
> On the tango lists, there are only two choices - you either die or be
> killed, or grow thick skin. Welcome to the list1
>
> Nina
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 02:16 PM 7/18/2007, Amaury de Siqueira wrote:
> >My first experience with list moderation date as far
> >back as 1993-4 with the
> >KMUG (Kansai Mac Users Group) list. At the end of the
> >day moderation was as
> >detrimental to the list as non-moderation.
> >
> >One of the rationales behind list moderation is
> >sustenance of an online
> >community. Implicit in this argument is the idea that
> >constant disruption
> >and flame war is likely to push certain members to
> >leave the community thus
> >eroding the quality of membership and content of
> >postings.
> >
> >The bottom line for me is the 'age' of a list. That
> >is, an old established
> >list with strong membership and displaying high
> >quality posting may not be
> >susceptible to the eroding effects of flame and
> >disruption. It seems to me
> >that this list's quality FAR exceed the once in a
> >while virulent posting of
> >some listeras. ;)
> >
> >Some flames evolve into rich discussion and edifying
> >exchanges. Nina's
> >abhorrent posting is a good case in point. I learned
> >as a result of an
> >initial nonsensical posting - (thank you to
> >Konstantin, Huck, and all
> >others)
> >
> >A censored list may strip the list of its richness of
> >expression. Granted
> >we should all try to display certain level of
> >civility. However, I must
> >say that the entertainment value of some postings
> >bring a smile to my face.
> >That alone makes it all worthwhile.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Amaury
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: tango-l-bounces@mit.edu
> >[mailto:tango-l-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf Of
> >m i l e s
> >Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 3:11 PM
> >To: tango-l@mit.edu
> >Subject: [Tango-L] A Cautionary Phrase (was:
> >Acrimoniousness)
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >After reading everyones responses my post about
> >Acrimoniousness...
> >
> >"You can tell a fool he's doing a foolish thing, it
> >may not change
> >anything, but at least the truth is where it needs to
> >be". - Kosh,
> >Vorlon Ambassador, Babylon 5.
> >
> >Oh and one thing about list moderation, the list
> >moderator in my
> >estimation in question isn't doing a good job of list
> >moderation if
> >they're acting like that. A good list moderator,
> >shepherds the
> >conversation and doesn't stifle it! That's a rare
> >skill and not
> >everyone is cut out for it, so its wise when starting
> >a list to pick
> >someone ELSE other than yourself to moderate a list.
> >
> >Lastly, I find it interesting that you folks took the
> >better portion
> >of my note and discarded it in favor of focusing on
> >the one thing
> >that was an after thought, the list moderation. As a
> >friend of mine
> >once said, "People are gonna do what they're gonna do,
> >and you can't
> >change that. But you can influence them by how you
> >carry yourself."
> >
> >M i l e s.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
>
>
>