Richard Clark wrote:
On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 16:47:20 GMT, "R. Scott"
wrote:

The reason for their alarm is they know people will go to the Moderated
group to get away from their
crap they are posting, thus they then wont have anyone left to hear their
drivel. The self imposed
importance thus will go away and they will be once again left to what they
really are.

Two amazing things about this:
1. It's taken 25 years to figure it out;
2. It hasn't happened yet;
3. They have to ask permission to see if it sounds like a good idea?

This is second in competency only to the Department of Homeland
Security: "All Katrina victims, assemble for your safety at the Sport
Coliseum. Busses, food, and water will arrive someday. Excuse the
bathrooms that are out of order and use the hallway."

Actually I encourage the development of a moderated group, they
deserve it. I can imagine some of our erstwhile visitors moving there
to author 1000 one entry threads. It'll be like a virtual hair trap
in the tub.


Your "one post thread" statement got me to wondering. If the moderator
doesn't like any of the answers to a question, do they "moderate" the
answers? (I'd use censor, but I fear I may have been abusive of the more
delicate readers here) Is the moderator duty bound to m-moderate
incorrect answers?

Is there any legal responsibility in all this? Which is to say would
the cen... dammit! Moderator have any responsibility to block our posts
about charging up capacitors in school, and shocking people with them?
Are they leaving themselves open to litigation?

Would posts about Isotron Antennas be allowed??

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -