From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 14e27f,d4b3d171336fca98 X-Google-Attributes: gid14e27f,public X-Google-Thread: f753e,544c98121879c710 X-Google-Attributes: gidf753e,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,544c98121879c710 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,544c98121879c710 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,544c98121879c710 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,544c98121879c710 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,d4b3d171336fca98 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 10a146,544c98121879c710 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public From: Ell Subject: Re: RFD: comp.object.moderated moderated Date: 1998/10/13 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 400702993 References: <907918039.22235@isc.org> <36237050.278941@news.erols.com> <3623921A.CD61B9E4@objectshare.com> X-Complaints-To: abuse@digex.net X-Trace: newsreader.digex.net 908303306 205.197.245.196 (Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:28:26 EDT) Organization: The Universe User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-980226 (UNIX) (SunOS/4.1.4 (sun4m)) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:28:26 EDT Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.ada,comp.object.corba,comp.software-eng,news.groups.news.announce.newsgroups Date: 1998-10-13T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: James Robertson wrote: >Ell wrote: >> >> I make these comments to point out the fallacies, unjustness and >> anti-democratic nature of the motivation behind moderation. After >> reading this RFD, I'm even more convinced that the motivation for >> moderation is to place discussion control in the hands of a small >> group and to deflect criticism away from them. There is every reason >> still to: VOTE NO! : Then feel free to keep posting in the unmoderated comp.object. I for one : would welcome a moderated group as an accessory to the unmoderated one. It should be more than a matter of simply having a moderated group. The thing is under what conditions? 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! 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.