[extropy-chat] META: "Killthread": Is it censorship or sensible?

[Lee Corbin]

Natasha writes

> It was called to my attention that there have been some problems
> on the list.  Since I am not a moderator I have not followed the
> thread on this and since I have been travelling for several weeks,
> I did not know there was a problem.

Well, thanks for your interest. Your advice is always quite welcome,
I am sure.

> But because we share this list as a venue to discuss and challenge
> ideas, I think that we all need to take a look at this:

> From: Eugen Leitl

> >  On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 01:53:25PM +1000, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> > John Grigg wrote:
> >
> > > Attempting to impeach the current president is not a realistic plan 
> >
> > Why would you think that? 
>
> Folks, killthread. This is completely off-topic for the list.

Gene killed the thread.  I missed that post somehow, myself, or I
would have shut up immediately (not that I'm sure I said anything
further).

> Brett responded:

> > "Eugen, just so you and I are absolutely clear. If you kill this
> > thread, or call for it to be killed again. If your are that censorious, I
> > will remember it and hold it against you whilst you and I live. I would
> > oppose your reanimation. I will regard you as in the aggregate an
> > entropic vector.

I was similarly threaten by Brett, as were a number of people.
Clearly, that is beyond the pale. And if Brett is reading this,
he really needs to chill.  As they say.

> > I am willing to be censored off the list, it is a private list after
> > all, but actions (like censorship) are facts that shape reactions.
> > Being a person in a world of persons, I take things personally.
> > Fair warning.

Uh oh. The threat has just become more ominous.

> > If I am censored off the list I would take that as diagnostic of the
> > degeneration of the list.  It is one thing to take issue with a person's
> > arguments and say so. It is another to stop other people from
> > hearing

Oh, okay---he's back to objecting to a thread being killed. Perfectly
sensible.  We all are occasionally miffed by that.

> > those arguments and expressing their reactions which may include
> > opposition to them. I regard censorship as a form of killing - as do 
> > you by the use of your word killthread. 

Whoa.  Like in killing *people* or something???

> > You are yourself a transient information thread that the universe
> > has yet to rule on."

Yikes, back to being very ominous again.

> Like Brett I do not like being censored.  But there is a difference
> between being censored and being sensible.  The extropy list does
> have rules and guidelines and list members are required to follow
> them in order to post on this list.  Whether or not Brett's thread is
> on topic for this list is one issue at stake.  Now, there are many
> variables involved that can add one way or another...

Yes; it takes a judicious hand at the helm.  While it is a shame that
threads ever need to be, ah, suppressed, the evidence is that 
unmoderated lists too often degenerate into real junk.  The life
of a moderator may not be an easy one, and we should always
respect ones of good judgment that do help preserve the health
of a list.  The Extropian list has always been lucky in having
volunteers of sound judgment take on this role, even if from
time to time, naturally, mistakes are made.

> And, finally, I do not like is the content of your (Brett's) response
> to the list moderator (Eugene) requesting that the thread be killed. 
> You made a threat and does not sit well with me and I'm sure
> others.

That's for damn sure!

> But putting that aside, what do other list members think of this thread?

It's hard to say.  In general, as far as overtly political thread so, I suppose
that so long as an effort is made to put something of a transhumanist
spin on the discussion that's fine.  Also, if it really is something that people
are spending a *lot* of time dwelling on (like 9/11 on 9/12), then it's
natural for us to discuss it. I do believe, though, that a *simple* debating
of political issues needs to be avoided, and at some point a moderator
is justified in squelching it.

Thanks for jumping in, Natasha.

Lee