Re: moderate techwr-l?

Subject: Re: moderate techwr-l?
From: "Eric J. Ray" <ejray -at- OKWAY -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 09:29:13 -0600

Gail (and all other contributors to this discussion),

I believe, as I've said in the past, that each of the
subscribers should moderate their own postings as well
as should send a private admonishment to a contributor
when they find something inappropriatly posted.

I do not have the time or inclination to moderate this
list; further, I think that having a moderated list
would effectivly stifle many or most interesting
discussions.

I don't think that we necessarily have a problem (that
said without having caught up on the 500 outstanding
messages in my box). If we do have one, I don't think
that moderating the list is the answer.

Please send comments and discussion to me privately.

Thanks!
Eric
ejray -at- okway -dot- okstate -dot- edu
TECHWR-L Listowner

BTW: Restricting postings to those from subscribers
excludes the USENET readers, therefore isn't
acceptable. Good idea, though.
I'm not about to start tweaking the LISTSERV code to
exclude certain messages--that's what they pay their
programmers for. ;-)
ejr


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: moderate techwr-l?
Author: Gail DeCamp <decampg -at- smtplink -dot- ngc -dot- com> at SMTP
Date: 1/5/95 4:59 PM

...
A possible solution: I'd like to propose that we think about having
the list moderated. Failing that, it may be possible to alter the list
code to exclude some of the more common problem messages (like mailer
daemons).

What do you all think?

Gail DeCamp
Speaking from, but not for, Network General Corporation


Previous by Author: Combine list msgs into one?
Next by Author: Re[2]: Safety & Manuals
Previous by Thread: Re: Moderate techwr-l?
Next by Thread: Re: Re[2]: moderate techwr-l?


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads