On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Brill Lyle <wp.brilllyle(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I was on a very active music mailing list for over 10
years and I was
grateful it was not moderated. Moderation can inhibit discussion, even when
there are disruptors, and it also requires moderators donate a lot of
volunteer hours. Which I think within the Wikimedia family community is
already being required of many of us. So I would vote against moderation.
If an argument / shift was towards moderation, maybe it could be based on
edit count and/or contributions? But that seems a bit extreme and awful.
- Erika
*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>*
We need moderators to manage spam if for no other reason, and it has been
helpful in many cases in the 8-9 years I have been subscribed to this list
to inhibit disruption and encourage civil exchange. We also have a "soft
limit" of 30 posts per month that has rarely needed to be enforced but is
still technically on the books.