Re: Moderated Techwr-l List? (#153900)

Subject: Re: Moderated Techwr-l List? (#153900)
From: wburns -at- MICRON -dot- COM
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 08:52:46 MDT

22-AUG-1996 07:24:58.70

This post is the second I've seen suggesting that Tom is
preaching for censorship. In my mind, this insinuation is
not only unfair to Tom, who was suggesting a *choice* for both
audiences (those who like chat and those who don't), but it
reduces the term "censorship" to mean any type of control
over content, regardless of whether that control is justified
by the medium's focus. Tom was not asking that *this* list be
moderated; he's asking if another, more focused list should be
added. A choice between the two would not suppress anyone's
ability to discuss what they wish; it would merely offer a more
focused option for those who have the desire for such a venue.

Academic journals and popular magazines have similar restrictions
on content. You would no more send an article on gardening to *Guns
and Ammo* (or on AR-15s to *Handguns*) than you would post chat about your
manager's poor understanding of technical communication on a moderated list for
advanced desktop publishing. This is *not* censorship. It is the same process
used in publishing to address specific audience needs (as opposed to biases).

Let's be fair about such suggestions. His intent was not to suppress
communication but to enhance it--albeit on a different, more focused
and, as yet, nonexistent list.

Bill Burns
Assembly Training and Documentation Supervisor
WBURNS -at- MICRON -dot- COM





>In article <n1371497516 -dot- 41712 -at- Griz>, Tom Neuburger
><Tom_Neuburger -at- ltx-tr -dot- com> wrote:

>> I have a suggestion--Would someone volunteer
>> to maintain a moderated techwriter list? I know
>> Eric is too busy, and I don't blame him for not
>> wanting yet another baby to sit. Any takers?
>>
>>
>> This is not about the morality of behavior--Colorful
>> people make the dullness bloom. The wonderful
>> inventiveness and variety of this species is a
>> constant delight. Makes me glad I joined.
>>
>> But I would sure love to split this list into its
>> components and subscribe to one of them.
>>
>> It's kind of like wanting the people next door
>> to stop throwing up on your sidewalk. I like them,
>> they're fun to play with, but I wish they didn't live
>> so close. And I kind of wish they didn't say--if
>> you don't like the mess, clean it up (delete it)
>> yourself.

>Your analogy is not accurate. I think that you need to hold the mirror up.
>You obviously enjoy the posts about the very subjects you claim need to be
>moderated out. You read them all, knowing what they were by the subject
>headings. A better analogy for this list is a television. Each program is
>a post. If you don't like the program, change the channel. If you don't
>like the post, go to the next and so on. Moderation is just another word
>for censorship.
>Brad

>--
>Brad Connatser
>Concurrent Communications
>concom -at- usit -dot- net

> TECHWR-L List Information
>To send a message about technical communication to 2500+ list readers,
>E-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send administrative commands
> ALL other questions or problems concerning the list
> should go to the listowner, Eric Ray, at ejray -at- ionet -dot- net -dot-






TECHWR-L List Information
To send a message about technical communication to 2500+ list readers,
E-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send administrative commands
ALL other questions or problems concerning the list
should go to the listowner, Eric Ray, at ejray -at- ionet -dot- net -dot-



Previous by Author: removal from list
Next by Author: Re: Moderated Techwr-l List? (#160593)
Previous by Thread: Re: Single Sourcing HTML Followup
Next by Thread: Re: Moderated Techwr-l List? (#153900)


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads