Re: Censoring Posts

<<That's the advantage of a club over
USENET; you
 can delete people you don't
like.>>

Unless we are willing to restrict access to this club in
some manner (I'm fairly sure it can be done, although
I don't recall if it can be done after a club is
formed), I don't see how deleting annoying members will
solve the problem; they can just come back under a
different name.

[Moreover, I don't know if there is
a fair way to verify identities without allowing
either denying access to people who deserve it, or
allowing access to people whose primary intent is
trolling.]

Also, I don't normally advocate public censorship
(i.e., denying people the right to express their views
in public). Because of the way this group is set up,
though, I would only consider 'censorship' of a post to
be unfair if the post (a) could not be construed as
having offensive or malicious intent, and (b) contained
some kernel of information that could be considered
relevant to QB. [An example of the latter, IMO, would be a
message advertising, say, a URL for
'warez'.]

IIRC, David has the right to appoint as many group
administrators as he likes. If people really want to 'moderate'
this group--I can see the benefits thereof, as well as
reasons not to--it would not be difficult to appoint a
group of moderators, who together could remove
inappropriate posts, instead of leaving it up to one
person.

--STI

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:44 AM EST EST