roundtable: Re: Letters from `Jlehm@aol.com'

roundtable: Re: Letters from `Jlehm@aol.com'

Re: Letters from `Jlehm@aol.com'

Richard K. Moore (rkmoore@iol.ie)
Sat, 4 Mar 1995 15:25:00 +0000 

Message-Id: <v02110106ab7dd1821182@[193.120.234.103]>
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 15:25:00 +0000
To: roundtable@cni.org
From: rkmoore@iol.ie (Richard K. Moore)
Subject: Re: Letters from `Jlehm@aol.com'


At 9:46 PM 3/03/95, Fred G Athearn wrote:
  -<snip>-
>     "...more liberal political dirvel from you junior
>      Slick WIllies and his venal and corrupt wife!"
  -<snip>-
>     I hope this is a one-shot operation, but I fear I have
>seen signs of intentional and non-spontaneous provocation and
>disruption on other lists.  Dealing with cyber-age psy-opps may
>be a telecommunications policy issue whose time has come.
>
>     What, if anything, beyond reposting with discussion, should
>be the response to such problems?
>
----------------------------------

There's a lot to be said for moderated lists.  Even if everyone's
"friendly", a moderator can add value in terms of selective 
concatenations, removal of redundant headers, elimination of 
"unsubscribe" messages, etc.

But in the presence of intentionally disruptive elements, moderation 
may be the only reasonable means of defense.  Actually I'm surprised 
at how little "agent provacateurism" has occurred thus far on the net, 
given the extremist tendencies and anti-liberal mentalities which are 
becoming increasingly prevelant.  We should be prepared for more of it.  
An unmoderated list, especially if it is at all effective politically, 
is an open invitation to trouble makers.

 ======================================================================
 Posted by --  Richard K. Moore --  rkmoore@iol.ie --  Wexford, Ireland
 List owner for -- cyber-rights & cyber-journal --  Ask to see the FAQs
 ======================================================================

[CNI Home Page]