> > That's the reason we need list moderators, to CULTIVATE the > list and > > encourage more signal in the postings. > > I don't know about "moderators", but I do think list admins > are appropriate. You want someone to watch the list and > curtail inappropriate behavior (and postings), and not really > to moderate the posts. Moderation suggests some control over > what gets posted to the mailing list, and unless you make the > list fully moderated, that is impossible. > > Unfortunately, one of the large disadvantages of an > unmoderated mailing has versus a moderated mailing list or > forum is the inability to retroactively remove posts that > have been made that were not on-topic, or otherwise not > appropriate. That said, I'd rather have an unmoderated > mailing list over either of the other options. The > information exchange is so much more important than the > ridged control or inappropriate behavior.
Yes, I agree that we want an unmoderated list. But we do need to have some "people" called something or other, who will cultivat the list and encourage more signal in the postings. For example, if the first offender was privately reminded that their posting about outages was too cryptic and privately asked to follow up with a URL etc., then they likely would do that, with an "oops, I forgot" kind of apology. Then the "somthing or other" person could follow up to the whole thread thanking the "oops" person for following up, and all would see that cryptic posts are not the NANOG way. --Michael Dillon P.S. the outages example was just that, a handy example. If only Gadi had posted his helpful reference to the main list... _______________________________________________ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
