RE: [ga] Comments from Pawlo

[Alex Kamantauskas <alexk@tugger.net>]

>> The way to combat the noisemakers is to give them the amount of
>> attention they deserve, which is none.  Proposing rules to deal with
>> them is no better than responding to them - it merely feeds their egos.
> 
> When the rules are in place, the noisemakers will be silenced.  And then
> there will be no noise relating to them.
> 

 Which leads into the reason, and the only reason, that I want an
 "unfiltered" list.  I'm not exactly sure what constitutes a "noisemaker"
 If a "noisemaker" is someone like Jeff Williams or Joe Baptista, then of
 course I don't mind them being filtered.  However, what if the
 "noisemaker" is someone who is presenting a position contrary to the list
 majority, and is beginning to gain a consensus?  I'm not saying that this
 will ever happen, but if that person is deemed a "noisemaker" by the
 powers that be and is removed from the list, at least their record will
 remain on the unfiltered list.  Yes, along with the noise that will
 surely flood the unfiltered list, but there are many deft enough with
 their own private filters that the unfiltered list can be just as useful
 as the filtered list (and perhaps even *more* useful).

 That is really my only concern.

--
Alex Kamantauskas
alexk@tugger.net