[GRLUG] List Moderation

[Justin Denick]

With the highest level of due respect, I commend the efforts of the
Grand Rapids Linux Users Group.

Many of you, like myself, joined this list to learn more about using
Linux at home or at work. The list
enabled us to get the support we needed without having to RTFM and if
we felt ambitious we could
post something that helped us so that someone else benefit from it

<flame>
Then you do actually post something and some geek with a keyboard,
finds fault with your logic. He posts
his drivel and you get pissed cause he thinks he has some authority
cause his buddies started the GRLUG.
Sweet, keep it. I like BASH, I have no problem RTFM, and debian is for
sissies who can't configure a kernel.
No need to suspend this account Mr. Folkert, my name is tado and I'm
out dis her biatch. Word.
.</flame>

GRLugers, I'm sure you're not jerks and I'm sure you all have mad
super human computer skillz and that your
list manners are just swell. But dude.


On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Tim Schmidt <timschmidt at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Justin Denick <justin.denick at gmail.com> wrote:
>  > We should really think seriously about list moderation.
>
>  I assume that's your way of volunteering...  or do you want others to
>  do the work?
>
>
>  >  I don't who is maintaining this server anymore,
>  >  but perhaps they might adjust the spam settings to discard any
>  >  message containing certain buzz words like "top posting".
>
>  You just tripped the filter yourself.  This topic was dead (or so I
>  thought) until you dredged it back up.
>
>
>  >  We may even extend that to include messages that only
>  >  serve to discredit our lists' reputation and inflame
>  >  our attitudes.
>
>  Ah, yes.  Let's ban everything controversial, and burn some books
>  while we're at it.
>
>
>  >  The moderator may then choose to suspend the individuals' grlug
>  >  account for a week or so.
>
>  IMHO, this sort of treatment should be reserved for spammers.  Normal
>  discussion is quite well regulated by communal consensus.
>
>
>  >  The constant discussion of RFC standards for electronic
>  >  communication
>
>  huh?
>
>
>  >  has made me  wonder if we don't look more like the Email Police
>  >  and less like Linux enthusiasts!
>
>  I don't particularly care what you or I look like...  Looks rarely
>  impart information of substance.
>
>
>  >  Imagine what a prospective employer or recruitment firm thinks
>  >  when reading our threads. I know they've read our posts, I've had
>  >  them mentioned to me by a respected staffing firm.
>
>  Are you implying that the words of individuals you may not have ever
>  met, may share nothing in common with (save membership to a diverse
>  mailing list), have never worked with, and have no other associations,
>  might influence your job prospects?
>
>  Ridiculous.
>
>  Your own actions, here, or anywhere else, are an employer's concern.
>  How you handle yourself when the things around you go to shit.
>
>  Were I an employer, I'd have liked to see you lead by example, and
>  attempt to reinforce and buttress upon existing community values.
>  That's how successful [community] management is done.  Instead, you
>  looked for someone else (a moderator, an objectionable content filter)
>  to fix your problems for you.  I'd be much more worried about what
>  _that_ says to a prospective employer than anything coming from my
>  email address.
>
>  --tim
>  _______________________________________________
>  grlug mailing list
>  grlug at grlug.org
>  http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug
>



-- 
In vino veritas.
 [In wine there is truth.]
 -- Pliny