Winship wrote:
>
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Louise Lawrence wrote:
> >
> > It goes without saying that if they violate policy their post is held, and they are >contacted by me.     If it turns out they do not contribute negatively to the situation >at hand, their post is approved & they are removed from review, never having known they >were being moderated.     This way I  will have been able to keep the list peaceful, >and no one has become upset by their knowledge of having been placed on review for a >"potential",  for something they have not done.
>

Douglas wrote:

> as, well, I don't think that's a nice thing to do, not cricket, not what a >"benevolent" dictator would do...

>They may well become *very* upset when they figure out what you have done
>and tried to keep secret.     Douglas

Douglas, I'm afraid I don't know to what you are referring, & it seems you have commented on the quoted statement at the top of the page out of context. .   If a member flames the list then their post will be held & they would  be contacted.  Are you suggesting it would be better to let a "flame
esculating" in content post reach the list?   If they do nothing inappropriate they are removed from review immediately.

Do you understand that all of this is in the context of a situation that has already become semi heated on list??   And *ONLY* at such a time?   That I am *NOT* talking about *ONGOING* review kept hidden from subs.??

I realise that the ever elusiveness of time is always a problem, and that it may be all one can do to quickly skim over the heaps messages at the end of the day.

However, if we thinking about replying in a manner that might insinuate a quality on the postee(as per your first reply),  it would serve us well to take at least a few extra moments for reading to be certain regarding the author s post content in these instances.

I am an individual who's number one value in life is personal integrity.  I've volunteered a lot of my time, effort/energy to my support list, and did not really appreciate an allusion that my actions may be less than "Kosher".  The point of my query was to achieve list harmony and efficacy without
making subscribers uncomfortable!

Frankly, misinterpretations due to not reading posts carefully is exactly was causes misunderstandings between subscribers on mailing lists many times.    Thankfully, I believe that most list owners have learned the value in getting things right before replying.

Louise L.

*********************
Louise wrote:

I'm *solely* speaking about situations where a subscriber has *not yet* done anything, however.   Using review as a *momentary*(couple of posts) preventative, or monitoring measure beforehand, when one can see things heating up on list, or even if there has been some sort of private exchange between
a list owner & sub. where one can sense that the member is unhappy & might retaliate on list.