On Mar 17, 2007, at 7:22 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
I second that, moderating is needed by someone otherwise this list
is down the tubes. Really, that was likely their goal all along.
One of them even said she'd do this till she died. That doesn't
sound much different from an Islamic terrorist. The list has been
destroyed by insurgents, quite literally.
How would you suggest it be moderated? If someone volunteered to do
it, what criteria would they follow? How would they be objective?
I seem to remember New Morn came up with some nice ideas that seemed
worth implementing. IIRC it was something like first time you're
banned for posting a couple of days and then each time thereafter,
longer. It seems to me there would have to be a limit, a "three
strikes and you're out" kinda thing. I really don't think it would be
hard to implement because it really is a case of 'a couple of bad
apples spoiling the whole bunch'.
