On 27 May 01, Russ Hunt wrote: > How many people "read all those messages to check for flames"? My view > is that once I've intervened once I'd have to intervene all the time, > because I'd have assumed responsibility for everything that > gets posted, and I'd have a moderated list whatever I preferred. I have to say I don't understand this approach, though I have heard it before. I suppose it is possible to manage a list without paying attention to the content (which is what it sounds like you are saying, if I read it right), but to me that is administering only, not managing. I think the list goes far better when there are clear policies for what is OK and what is not, and the moderator enforces them (gently but firmly). My experience is that this is fairly easy because once you put it in place and people learn that it will be enforced, they mostly stick to it. When there are not enforced policies many lists devolve from time to time into flame wars. They may end up looking successful but in fact many people outside the circle of those who can tolerate the flames will stay away or leave. I don't buy the "slippery slope" argument that any moderation implies judging and taking reponsibility for everything. I let a lot of things go, but if the policies are violated I step in (this would not work if the policies were not clear beforehand). On the adoption-related list I run people express the oddest opinions and say things that I think are flat out wrong. I don't make an issue out of it (except occasionally with the list manager hat clearly off) and feel no responsibility for it. But when they start calling each other names, I step in. I do realize that the net has a traditon, based in Usenet, of total self- moderation. My feeling is if people like that environment there are plenty of places for it, but that it doesn't lead to good information flow or build community (or if it does, that happens in spite of the unmoderated nature of the venue) -- and those would generally be two of my goals for most discussion lists I can imagine. ----- Tom Rawson [log in to unmask]