--- On Sat, 8/29/09, Brianna Laugher brianna.laugher@gmail.com wrote:
From: Brianna Laugher brianna.laugher@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] moderate this list To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Saturday, August 29, 2009, 9:36 AM 2009/8/29 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
If you'd like to start a moderated foundation-l, in
addition to the regular
foundation-l, that might be useful. But it's
considerably inappropriate for
you to sign up for a mailing list that many of us have
been enjoying for
years and in one month decide you want to alter it to
suit your tastes.
"Enjoying"? Maybe more accurate for many of us is "barely tolerating".
I am with Anders. It is not just a matter of learning to use an email client properly. Considered posts are soon piled under dozens of back-and-forth-over-minor-details responses.
But it doesn't seem the culture of foundation-l at this point would allow moderation to make it a more proportionate place. Which is a shame as in theory it is our main Wikimedia-wide channel of communication, and must be terribly off-putting for newcomers.
I am only still subscribed because I blacklist several people who I find excessive (although not Anthony). But I don't think moderation as answer here. Who would dare to take on the chore of moderator and what will be the result. Look at what happened the last time someone was moderated; we had how many messages full of smears about the moderation itself? I don't know exactly the number because I quickly adjusted my blacklist to the poster's new email address. I wonder if no one responds to Thomas Dalton for a month how much he will continue to post. I understand why people want moderation, but I don't think it is practical. However, filters solve a majority of the problem. The biggest help would be people resisting the urge to reply when someone is obviously looking for a debate for debate's sake.
Birgitte SB