Ideal moderation, for me (and perhaps this isn't even possible; I'm not sure how the backends of these mailing lists work) would be directed at users, not individual emails. I wouldn't expect a moderator to approve every post, or to edit posts, or anything like that. But I would expect them to enforce the idea of "if you can't engage calmly and without attacking your colleagues, you don't get to engage here." A cool-down timeout if someone just seems to have gotten out of hand temporarily; permanent removal from the list if the person persistently cannot behave in a collegial manner.

Yes, this puts me pretty strongly on the side of the evil "Civility Police." So be it.

-Fluff

On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 7:07 PM, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86@comcast.net> wrote:
So that everyone is on the same frequency; what exactly is meant by
"moderation" when it comes to a discussion/conversation/debate? And what,
exactly, is a "moderator" expected to do"

Marc Riddell


on 10/3/11 6:56 PM, Nathan at nawrich@gmail.com wrote:

> I agree that several posts recently should have resulted in some sort
> of moderation. I'm not sure [[WP:CIVIL]] is the answer... That's an
> English Wikipedia policy, and applying en.wp policies to non-en.wp
> venues generally gets a strong reaction from non en.wp'ers :-P
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap


_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap