Schlecks' direction on moderation
 

John Smith I wrote:
--strange they ALL seem to have extra licenses, isn't it?

Isn't it slightly analogous to universities preferring
teachers with PhD degrees?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Schlecks' direction on moderation
 

On Jan 28, 10:45 am, Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith I wrote:
--strange they ALL seem to have extra licenses, isn't it?Isn't it slightly analogous to universities preferring
teachers with PhD degrees?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Universities and the public would be better served with teachers
having a Masters degree and real work experience... instead of a bunch
of bickering eggheads who've never had to earn a living.

Schlecks' direction on moderation
 

Cecil Moore ) writes:
John Smith I wrote:
--strange they ALL seem to have extra licenses, isn't it?

Isn't it slightly analogous to universities preferring
teachers with PhD degrees?

In this case, no.

I don't see a bias in the proposed moderators in the proposed moderated
newsgroup.

But, moderators are generally there to keep the junk out of the newsgroup,
not to edit content. They aren't there to evaluate what is being said,
they are there to determine whether the post is off-topic and/or will
cause problems in the newsgroup.

It would take a pretty incapable person to not be able to tell the difference
between what was on-topic and what doesn't belong. We are talking about a
pretty clear divide. ANd even borderline posts, it doesn't require High
Learning to decide, it requires judgement.

I'm not convinced that the moderators for this proposed newsgroup actually
need to be hams. Some guy walking in off the street is just as capable
as making most of those judgements as anyone else. The caveat being
that their unfamiliarity with the hobby might make them let things slip
through, when they didn't know the difference between amateur radio and
CB or something else. But even then, that's not tied to needing a piece
of paper, it's tied to whether someone is familiar enough with the hobby.

I would argue that there is a bias in even making an analogy to higher
learning. Because there is something about the tone of all this proposed
newsgroup that sure seems to place it in academia, and I'm not convinced
that is a good thing.

Michael VE2BVW

Schlecks' direction on moderation
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith I wrote:
--strange they ALL seem to have extra licenses, isn't it?

Isn't it slightly analogous to universities preferring
teachers with PhD degrees?

EXACTLY! Maybe there is even an argument on a university scale, with a
hobby--no ...

Regards,
JS

Schlecks' direction on moderation
 

Schlecks' direction on moderation
 

Michael Black wrote:

...
I don't see a bias in the proposed moderators in the proposed moderated
newsgroup.
...

You took a blue pill ...

Regards,
JS

Schlecks' direction on moderation
 

"Michael Black" wrote in message
...

[snip]

I'm not convinced that the moderators for this proposed newsgroup actually
need to be hams. Some guy walking in off the street is just as capable
as making most of those judgements as anyone else. The caveat being
that their unfamiliarity with the hobby might make them let things slip
through, when they didn't know the difference between amateur radio and
CB or something else. But even then, that's not tied to needing a piece
of paper, it's tied to whether someone is familiar enough with the hobby.

I would argue that there is a bias in even making an analogy to higher
learning. Because there is something about the tone of all this proposed
newsgroup that sure seems to place it in academia, and I'm not convinced
that is a good thing.

Michael VE2BVW


I would agree that the moderators only really need to be people of good
judgment. None of us really object to off-topic posts to any great degree.
What is objectionable is that there are several people who seem to feel a
need to stoop to name calling, profanity, vulgarity, ad hominem attacks and
so on rather than indulge in the simple pleasure of debate.

You will notice that the most vehement of those opposing the moderated news
group are those that have the worst behavior. It seems that all they really
want is to insure that they have targets to continue their tactics.

Of course we could just filter them but every few days you have to add
another as they keep coming up with new IDs. My killfile is huge these
days.

Dee, N8UZE

Schlecks' direction on moderation
 

On Jan 28, 11:08 am, (Michael Black) wrote:
Cecil Moore ) writes:
John Smith I wrote:
--strange they ALL seem to have extra licenses, isn't it?

Isn't it slightly analogous to universities preferring
teachers with PhD degrees?In this case, no.

I don't see a bias in the proposed moderators in the proposed moderated
newsgroup.

fuuny I guess you have not been reading the posts of some of them to
this NG

One of felt it was On Topic to enage in MAKING statement that a poster
was was insane due to his sexual orientation dispite knowing and
posting about how the APA disagrees

another clearly felt it a shock to suggest that the Techs in general
might be developing a different and valid view of the ARS

But, moderators are generally there to keep the junk out of the newsgroup,
not to edit content. They aren't there to evaluate what is being said,
they are there to determine whether the post is off-topic and/or will
cause problems in the newsgroup.

based the samples I have subitmeted (at their request and been banned
from further exploration of that system for my trouble BTW

it spears they intend SERIOUS editiorail control

I would argue that there is a bias in even making an analogy to higher
learning. Because there is something about the tone of all this proposed
newsgroup that sure seems to place it in academia, and I'm not convinced
that is a good thing.

it is a GOOD if you want to propate the Status quo

that the pronetns seem to think the NEW NG is a Good thing it leads a
thinking man to question if it is not designed conously or not to
acheive that end

Michael VE2BVW

Schlecks' direction on moderation
 

On Jan 28, 11:15 am, John Smith I wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith I wrote:
--strange they ALL seem to have extra licenses, isn't it?

Isn't it slightly analogous to universities preferring
teachers with PhD degrees?EXACTLY! Maybe there is even an argument on a university scale, with a
hobby--no ...

and in that context it is hard to selnce the student unlike the
proposed NG

Regards,
JS

Schlecks' direction on moderation
 

an_old_friend wrote:

...
and in that context it is hard to selnce the student unlike the
proposed NG
Regards,
JS


AOF:

Valid point. Well said.

Regards,
JS