[Foundation-l] Moderation and this list

[Andrew Whitworth]

> I have to say that I agree with Birgitte here.  For me, Foundation-l has
> becoming incresasingly useless as a mailing list because it is so
> frequently dominated by people who seem to be very "bitter and
> mean-spirited" to the point that they are on the attack no matter what
> happens.

So ignore them, block them, ban them, etc. If there are people whose
mean-spiritedness is preventing us from conducting legitimate business
here, or is preventing this list from being a useful resource, those
people should be removed from it. It is not anybody's duty or
responsibility to "put up" with people who are unhelpful,
unproductive, and even counter-productive. This list has a purpose and
"empowering trolls" or "dealing with trolls" is not that purpose.

> I am unsure what we should do about foundation-l.  It has become a
> sewer.  It is difficult to balance our very strong desire for an
> unmoderated forum where people can feel comfortable making strong
> criticisms (nothing wrong with that!) with a forum where trolls are
> exhausting a lot of good people and spreading misinformation due to the
> inability of others to keep up with the sheer volume of malice.

I don't see why this list has to be "unmoderated". None of the wikis
are unmoderated, and some of them are very strictly moderated. Set
rules: legitimate users will follow them, trolls will not. This is not
to say that the rules need to be complicated, or strict, etc. The
rules may not even need to be explicit, set some moderators who have
good judgement and tell them that they will "know it when they see
it". Hell, it works for pornography in the US, it will work for trolls
on the mailinglist.

I would also submit a small disagreement that this list has become a
"sewer", but it's effectiveness has certainly been limited
unnecessarily.

--Andrew Whitworth