Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

nafex - Re: [NAFEX] Moderating the list.

nafex@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: North American Fruit Explorers mailing list at ibiblio

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Thomas Olenio" <tolenio@sentex.net>
  • To: "North American Fruit Explorers" <nafex@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [NAFEX] Moderating the list.
  • Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 08:27:04 -0500

Helllo,

Very sane, and I have seen similar rules in most email groups that do not dissolve into chaos.

No one is condeming our moderator. If the moderator does not have time to enforce some rules of civility, and keeping the group focused, possibly there is another NAFEX member who does have the time. No one is asking that the burden fall to someone without the time to do it.

I have seen older, larger, more established listserv groups destroyed by a single individual who takes glee in their destructiveness.

I realize we have an open posting format, but when something really nasty come across the forum we all can recognize it. There is no harm in a moderator warning and barring repeat offenders.

I know of one exellent moderator who not only warns and bans, but deletes threads from the archives that are not appropriate to the forum's archives. Foolishness is not enshrined in the listserv archives forever. He takes the position that a moderator has the job of moderation.

We can always do things better, does no harm to consider changes.

Later,
Tom


On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 08:06:58 -0500, Pat Meadows <pat@containerseeds.com> wrote:

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 00:31:19 EST, you wrote:

Dear list,

My 2 cents worth also stands with Greg. To ban or not to ban is the question.

Where is the fine line in the wind blown sand?

I've been on email lists a long time and Usenet newsgroups
for a long time (until they mostly became worthless because
of spammers and trolls) - 16 years, to be exact - since the
days when the Internet was available to anyone but
universities and the government. That's an aeon in
'Internet time'.

The policy that I have generally seen adopted on mailing
lists is this:

1. The desires of the list-owner are the rules. He/she
gets to make the rules and to enforce them or not.

2. It helps if there are written guidelines for the list so
members can know what is or is not allowed.

3. Moderators (if it's a moderated list) do *not* edit
posts. They either kill them or send them as is.

4. On unmoderated lists - where all posts go directly to
the membership (like this one) - listowners will generally
warn offenders at least once. More patient listowners will
warn offenders two or three times: then they kick them out.

This policy usually works pretty well.

Total laissez-faire is very apt to wind up in chaos and a
useless list.


Maybe a private censure statement could be privately sent to offenders by the
moderator. But again where is the line not to be crossed.

It's - again - up to the listowner.

On lists I have owned I did not tolerate spam, harassment,
obscenities, stalking, bigotry, repeated irrelevant posts
obviously meant to harass, flame wars, or discussion of
verboten topics, if any (usually religion, politics, gun
control, abortion rights).

I am able to draw the line at an appropriate point (judging
by the fact that lists I owned retained their membership and
were lively and not 'sound asleep'). I think most people
would be able to do this also.

Pat





--
============




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page