[Tfug] Interesting point (was Bunghole!)

[Jon]

I like your approach, Jim. When the list was transfered to my control I
wanted to treat it like this. Many people voiced concerns over
"moderation" (they were misuing the term moderation) so I dropped it.

I say just let people be on the list until they:

	- Threaten someone (please god them them threaten me)
OR
	- Become so disruptive to the list that the list has lost its
	  direction.

Now I would agree with anyone that says point #2 has been become true. I
have emailed people regarding individual infractions and asking them to
maintain a lower profile and take people's personal feelings into account
when addressing them, on the list.

I think this is a good approach too. People should be asked to take
measures to correct things before we dive off the deep end and kick someone
off the list. It sounds very elementary but I'm sure you all would like the same
degree of consideration if you were involved in something inappropriate.

But then again this isn't my list. I just manage the hardware and software
for it. This is a community list. If everyone on the list feels
hardcore about this one way or another then I guess we can as a "group"
take action on that particular topic.

The end.

Jon


On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Jim Secan wrote:

> list and keeps the off-the-wall topics/threads in the sandbox.  Or, perhaps
> the ListUberMeister (LUM) could hold a tighter control on the one list and
> be willing/allowed to ruthlessly remove people from that list if they won't
> follow the guidlines while allowing just about anything to go on the
> all-bets-are-off list.  This may put more workload on the LUM than he wants
> - hmm?
>
> Jim