Hey Shawn First off I apologize - I snipped too much :)
I was responding to Niels comment "I have no idea how this nonsense made it to the list" in response to the creator of this thread. I guess I was just trying remind Niels of what he had stated in the past ... >Niels Voll >Mon, 08 Nov 2004 17:22:58 -0800 >Sorry, but I respectfully disagree: Dialog does not suck. >Open dialog is a good thing, especially in a community where "open" is >generally a positive >thing. I also wanted to bring forward the discussion of what should and should not be let through... what are the guidelines? There are none as far as I know except for size (which Jarrod has responded to in another email) so why let anything through? I guess that is for the moderator to decide but if he/she has no criteria - then how can that decision be made effectively and objectively. I want to express here that I completely disagree with 'Tom' - however I am only able to express my opinion on his email because it was allowed through to the list. These recent events should maybe open a discussion about the posting or not posting an unsubscribed/unauthorized mail to the list. Just opening a dialogue :-) not sending barbs at anyone - and I agree no wrong doing... just seems that the guidelines of the mailing list need to be broadened to include what to do with what is awaiting the moderator Cheers Kari > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of Shawn > Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 9:06 AM > To: CLUG General > Subject: Re: [clug-talk] Microsoft to Sue linux users > > > Kari, I think you missed the meaning of the messages. There > is no "censoring" > going on at all. But the way the mailing list works, messages from > non-members will be put aside until a list administrator (or > moderator for > lack of better words) can take a look at them and allow them through. > > This is not censoring at all. It's hardly even moderating of > the list. It's > simply an administrative setting that prevents spam from > flooding the list. > Only email addresses that have signed up can post to the > list. Some of us > have multiple addresses and will occasionally post to the > list from one that > is not signed up on the list. These messages are not simply > discarded but > set aside for review. > > Jarrod's message was indicating that he had handled these > messages the list > software had set aside, and one of Kevin's legitimate > messages was in the > list. Neils simply was making light of the issue and doing a quasi > comparison of Jarrod's role in this to that of a SlashDot moderator. > > There is no wrong doing here... > > My apologies if it's ME who is mis-reading the tone of your > message. :) > > Shawn > > > On Tuesday 30 November 2004 08:31, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I must admit that I am shocked at both of you > > > > Niels - you were one of the many who stated that the > Executive had no right > > to stop a conversation. I took that to mean ANY > conversation not just the > > ones that you agreed with. > > > > Jarrod - I believe that the Exec have no right to sensor > mail posted to the > > list unless it is obvious spam or vulgar or in any way > discriminating to > > race, colour, creed, etc. > > > > This is a free and open list just like the software and the > movement we all > > claim to extol. > > > > As always this is just my 2 cents and its probably not even > worth that - > > but I did not want to sit back and have people say it was > OK to sensor mail > > for context/content. > > > > Kari > > _______________________________________________ > clug-talk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca > Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) > **Please remove these lines when replying > _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) **Please remove these lines when replying
