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

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

Re: Letters from `Jlehm@aol.com'

Vigdor Schreibman - FINS (fins@access.digex.net)
Mon, 6 Mar 1995 11:20:09 -0500 (EST) 

Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 11:20:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Vigdor Schreibman - FINS <fins@access.digex.net>
To: roundtable@cni.org
Subject: Re: Letters from `Jlehm@aol.com'
In-Reply-To: <v02110106ab7dd1821182@[193.120.234.103]>
Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950306111136.28265D-100000@access2.digex.net>


On Sun, 5 Mar 1995, Richard K. Moore wrote:
> 
> 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.


  Its all coming, particularly, driven by a mean-spirited "conservative" 
politics, but it may be that the delete button and adaptive learning 
remain the best long terms strategies for now, in my view.  Net-smart 
is where we can succeed most often, while a mean-spirited strategy has 
many weaknesses that can backfire.  Let's play those odds to make them 
advance out cause and stay away from the fear, panic, and censorship 
respose.  

  Vigdor 

Vigdor Schreibman
<fins@access.digex.net>

[CNI Home Page]