On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Carcharoth carcharothwp@googlemail.com wrote:
You can add to the advantages that it can also produce a "why did you moderate *him*?" response from list members. I got an e-mail from the other user you placed on moderation, and I was puzzled as to why he had been placed on moderation.
Yeah, for sure. Being list moderator is pretty much a no-win game: the best you can hope for is that no one notices your presence. Once someone starts posting in such a way that a few people get annoyed, or they start mildly breaking the list rules, then any action will be divisive. Either leave them unmoderated (continuing to annoy people), moderate them (cop flak for being heavy-handed), etc.
I think that if the person you moderate objects to it, and wants it announced on the list, you should do so.
Of course.
You can also add "increases transparency".
Good point.
I have no idea how many people are on moderation on this list. Some numbers might help there. I would also ask how many people are subscribed to this list, but that might be rather a low figure. Are there public stats anywhere for this list?
There don't seem to be. The administrative interface doesn't give good stats either, it will only tell you for a given user whether they're on moderation or not. At a guess, somewhere between 20 and 50 users are on moderation, out of 1004 total.
And Thomas' comment:
Personally, I am in favour of such announcements. If you aren't
announcing it publicly, it is an absolute must to inform the affected person privately
Yes. If only because generally you put someone on moderation in order to change their behaviour, so it would be counter-productive not to inform them.
Steve