A timely and very clear reminder As promised, I am collecting votes (offline, to avoid cluttering up the list) on whether Stevan should remain as moderator of the list. Please note that we are NOT voting on (a) whether Stevan should change his posting style (he has already said that he will not do so) or (b) whether Stevan should cease to participate in the list - this has never been proposed and indeed there would be precious few postings without him.
If you had misunderstood what you were voting about and want to change your vote, in either direction, just let me know Sally Sally Morris Consultant, Morris Associates (Publishing Consultancy) South House, The Street Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex BN13 3UU, UK Tel: +44(0)1903 871286 Fax: +44(0)8701 202806 Email: sa...@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk -----Original Message----- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of Jan Velterop Sent: 13 October 2008 08:22 To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Re: Call for a vote of nonconfidence in the moderator of the AmSci Forum Apologies for the lateness of my comments on this matter. Stevan has my full support. He is fully entitled to post on this list what he wants and to withold submissions if he deems that right. Those who hold the view that a list such as this one should ~V or indeed can ~V be run 'objectively' and according to some pseudo-democratic rules are, frankly, a bit naïve. Those who don~Rt like Stevan~Rs judgement with regard to acceptance of submissions can always start their own list. That said, Stevan hasn~Rt made it easy on himself, combining the task of moderator with that of host. Other lists separate these roles, and he may wish to consider drafting someone in to help him run the list and do the same (Stevan being the host; someone else being the moderator, I would have thought, given the definitions of the roles, see below). The definitions that, for instance, the BBC uses for the two roles are along the following lines: A host's job is to encourage interesting discussions and to help resolve disagreements. They post regularly on the lists, start discussions or reply to questions. Hosts do not reject messages. A moderator's job is to reject messages that break the ~QHouse Rules~R. Messages will not be rejected for any other reason. Moderators do not post messages on the lists. Among the BBC ~QHouse Rules~R are the following (there are more). Messages are rejected that ~EAre racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable ~EContain swear words or other language likely to offend ~EBreak the law or condone or encourage unlawful activity. ~EAre considered to be off-topic ~EAre considered to be ~Qspam~R, that is posts containing the same, or similar, message posted multiple times. Apart from the possible problem of finding such help, the only difficulty of my suggestion that I can foresee is perhaps dealing with the last house rule mentioned. But then again, Stevan is free to set his own house rules. Jan Velterop=
