I thought spam filtering was generally automated by a machine without an opinion on social issues and moderation was basically the censorship of messages based on the whim of a human?
On 15 October 2016 11:41:17 GMT+01:00, "Shawn K. Quinn" <skqu...@rushpost.com> wrote: >On Fri, 2016-10-14 at 22:24 -0300, #$%& wrote: >> To be more precise. Expect to find absolutely no russian >> propaganda, because that list is fully 'moderated'. That is, >> censored. And expect it to contain loads of american >> propaganda, which the 'moderators', aka censors, simply >> consider >> to be 'ontopic' 'morally perfect' 'legitimate' 'content'. > >Moderation is not censorship. Moderation is the selective approval of >messages so that a forum is not effectively censored by the prevalence >of off-topic material, and to maintain standards of decorum and >conduct. > >Moderation, when done properly, is actually the *prevention* of >constructive censorship. If this list were to be overrun by spam for >knock-off Ray-Ban and Oakley sunglasses, penis enlargement pills, Dr. >Oz >approved acai berry diet pills, or even ads for VPNs that accept >payments in Bitcoin, I'm sure most of you would demand something be >done >to protect the integrity of the forum. > >-- >Shawn K. Quinn <skqu...@rushpost.com> -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
