> Earlier: "... I'm here for the dialog
> with anyone who wants to read and
> possibly respond. I believe the list
> belongs to all of us, altogether,
> future readers, too. Once the 2nd
> person joins, it's a 50/50
> proposition. The third person
> makes it a 33/33/33 proposition,
> and so on...calling someone else's
> contributions "obsessive" merely
> identifies ourselves as intolerant,
> bored, or recalcitrant. I value
> every member, especially the
> provocative posts, the ones that
> make me think, and make me
> reconsider my point of view..."
> One response: "...This is a noble
> sentiment...[but]...spend some
> time on Usenet...unrestricted
> dialog...a swamp..."
Apples and oranges.
This groups is moderated to delete spam, vandalism and extended
off-topic threads. So, if someone is not a spammer, not a vandal, and
is on-topic, the moderators don't have to spend a moment dealing with
them - let their posts through. Then it's up to us users to read, or to
scroll on.
I do not understand the complaints against posts that are not spam, not
vandalism, not off topic. I scroll past many non-spam, non-vandalism,
on-topic threads because I'm not interested. Why would I ask the
moderator to block the contributors to and readers of those threads?