Ell wrote:

> James Robertson wrote:
>
> >Ell wrote:
> >>
> Did you read really the heinous rules for the group.  Did you fail to see
> the way that moderators can operate in way such that subjective desires
> and wishes can predominate?  They can do this by allowing "short" (what's
> short?) one-upsmanship posts! They can also do it by posting personal
> remarks in posts.  Did you fail to see that there is no provision for
> electing new moderators?!  Not to mention that moderators are elected for
> life!

So what ?  If they end up doing a poor job, no one will post and the group will
die - all the traffic would saty in the unmoderated forum.  If they do a good
job, then intelligent discussion will tend to migrate towards the moderated
forum.

No one is holding a gun to anyone's head - we can all read whatever we like,
and post to any group we want.  The addition of a group (moderated or not)
<expands> choices.

>
>
> Why should they use Usenet to advance one view?  Why should they be
> allowed to wrap themselves in the flag of comp. to shield themselves from
> criticism?
>
> Elliott
> --
> :=***=:  VOTE NO TO MODERATION!  ALL IDEAS SHOULD BE CRITICIZABLE! :=***=:
>              MODERATORS SHOULD NOT HAVE LIFETIME TERMS!
>    :=***=:  Objective  *  Pre-code Modelling  *  Holistic  :=***=:
>                  Hallmarks of the best SW Engineering
>  Check out SW Modeller vs SW Craftite Central : www.access.digex.net/~ell
>    Copyright 1998 Elliott. exclusive of others' writing. may be copied
>      without permission only in the comp.* usenet and bitnet groups.



--
Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library

<Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of ObjectShare>