Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Michael Coslo" wrote in message ... a gazillion newsgroups trimmed to rrap Dee Flint wrote: OK John, clean up this newsgroup so I don't have to add filters on an almost daily basis to eliminate the constant deluge of sex posts, vulgar posts, etc. Hi Dee, The point is as I see it, that when we place what we see and read into the hands of others, we might not see what we want to see. I am perfectly happy to use Xnews to get rid of the fringe elements. And at what level do we censor. And let us mince no words, a post that does not get past the moderator is censored. I agree that is true. Yet I see no way to get people to censor themselves. And yes I can and have added my own filters with no problems. However this only makes the filth invisible, it doesn't do a thing to clean it up. The real problem is that it spreads. If person X gets away with it, then person Y thinks its OK too. Eavesdrop on a bunch of today's middle school kids and you'll really get an earful. That type of behavior gets carried over into adult life. Work places now have to have training to let their employees know it is NOT ok to act this way in the workplace. An example is that you have decided to filter out posts from Len Anderson. On the other hand, I enjoy reading his posts, even though I don't always agree with them, and sometimes the arguments with Jim and Dave can get a little circular. (from all posters) But I can't imagine the newsgroup without him. Or Jim, or Dave. All that I would do would be to return them to the writer and tell him to delete the name calling and when resubmitted would let them on through. His tendency to go off-topic and write long-winded diatriabes doesn't bother me. I like lively debates and disagreements so long as civility is maintained, name calling is excluded and ad hominem attacks are not allowed. His general writing style is quite good. What would you do as a censor-moderator to his posts? How about the posts where two people disagree, and one notes that he thinks the other is being unrealistic? Obtuse? Stupid? Where is the line? Telling a person that they are acting stupid is quite different than telling them they are stupid. However my opinion is telling them they are acting stupid is ok, telling them the are stupid is marginal, while name calling is unacceptable (Nun of the Above, Herr Oberst, and so on). I find the same posts offensive that you do, with the exception of Len's. But I really prefer to make my own choices instead of have someone else make them for me. Well that's the nice thing about keeping the old group in addition to creating a new one. A person can choose where to go and when to go there. The creation of a moderated group gives us the freedon to have it both ways and enhances our choices. Notice that the ones objecting most strenuously are the ones that make a habit of unpleasant behavior. It seems to me that they are afraid they will lose their targets. Dee, N8UZE |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Schlecks' Schlock! | Policy | |||
Schlecks' Schlock! | General | |||
Schlecks' Schlock! | Antenna | |||
Schlecks' Schlock! | Boatanchors | |||
Schlecks' Schlock! | Homebrew |