[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ga] The noise is not reaching me...

your logic make good sense here  darrell...

ken stubbs
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Darrell Greenwood <darrell_greenwood@mindlink.net>
To: <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2000 4:33 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] The noise is not reaching me...

> At 9:36 AM -0800 1/14/0, Kent Crispin wrote:
> >Individual filtering by list members is no substitute for list rules.
> >Many of the people we most want participating are both 1) the least
> >likely to know how to manage filters and 2) the most likely to be turned
> >away by the loud threatening behavior of thugs.  I refer to lawyers,
> >policymakers, some businesspeople, not to mention the vast majority of
> >newcomers to the net.  Lawyers, policymakers, and businesspeople don't
> >*need* this list to communicate with ICANN -- they will find other ways
> >to get their opinion heard.  The newcomers will simply get turned off
> >and go away.
> >
> >What you are in effect saying is:  "If people don't know enough to
> >configure their filters, then they don't need to participate."  This
> >is, as the saying goes "penny wise and dollar foolish".
> >
> >Moreover, the first thing anyone interested in this forum will do is go
> >look at the archives, which already are almost useless.  There isn't
> >any way to filter the archives...
> IMHO, these are very good points that Kent makes. Especially the
> point about driving away people we want on this list.
> A couple of comments, IMO some people are confusing censorship and
> discipline. When an individual is disciplined by ejection from the
> filtered list for breaking the list rules, it is not censorship.
> The best alternative seems to be two lists, filtered and unfiltered,
> with the filter rules easily available to check. I would only need
> archiving of the filtered list. I leave to others to justify the need
> to archive the unfiltered list, but I don't see the need and I find
> some people are always too eager to expend someone else's resources.
> Cheers,
> Darrell