[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Free speech and GA (Re: [ga] Time to put...)
At 13:31 31.12.99 -0600, Weisberg wrote:
>Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> > Michael,
> > I agree that we should have a moderated list.
> > The problem is the definition of a fair set of rules.
>What activities do we need to protect against and what rules are capable of
>addressing those specific problems?
The two issues we seem to be facing at present are:
- Claims of a single individual posting under multiple names, which has led to
a request for a verifiable identification of people posting here
- Irrelevant messages, including messages that cause large amounts of debate
with no forward movement in any process
Added to that, we have the bashing-at-open-doors posting of a certain
person who, despite being able to post in his own name, chooses to use
others' names; the relevance of the point he's making is that we should
have a visible rule about who's allowed to post or not, instead of asking
our listadmin to both make the rules and enforce them.
The list technologies we have available are:
- Prefiltered mailing lists, which mechanically disallow certain messages
and let others through
- Moderated mailing lists, which require human approval of all messages
- Semimoderated lists, which let some messages through, but require human
approval for others.
In addition, we have the possibility of using cryptographic verification of
messages to the list; this requires that the posters have this technology
Happy new year to everyone!
(insomniac in the year 2000)
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway