[ExI] Moderation on the ExiCh list

[Stefano Vaj]

2009/12/5 Robert Bradbury <robert.bradbury at gmail.com>:
> But as a person of conviction, I happen to believe in the first article of
> the Bill of Rights, e.g. "Congress shall make no law respecting an an
> establishment of religion, or prohibiting the exercise thereof [1]; OR
> ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH [2], .." should be taken very seriously.

Interesting. I am myself a moderator of a few lists, and in turn
happened at least once to be the victim of the moderation (or rather
the owner) of a list at that time managed by one of my couple of
personal trolls/poltergeists, who interpreted such role as the ability
to engage in, by no means "moderate", attacks and flames where the
ability of the other party to reply is by definition restricted.
Unsurprisingly, the list members eventually migrated elsewhere,
including those who had not directly suffered such behaviours...

I think that both the moderation when in doubt should err on the side
of the freedom of speech (and be very vigilant with regard to its own
personal and ideological biases) AND that a moderation should exist.
This not only as a matter of ideological or aesthetical taste, but for
very practical reasons which have to do with its continuing viability
and success.

> The point of a moderated list would presumably be to minimize the exposure
> of the list to defamation lawsuits, and in some cases "accuracy" statements
> (say the Raelians were to start auto-cross-posting their fluff.

No. The real point of moderation and the real (and only) cardinal sin
in mailing lists is IMHO Off-Topic. Flames are off-topic. Spam is
off-topic. Ad hominem are off-topic. Tireless single-issue evangelism
is off-topic. Bilateral chit-chat is off-topic. Off-topic is what
reduce the signal-to-noise ratio, annoys and ultimately keep away
other participants. Cut the OT, but only the OT, and you have nothing
else that you need (or should) do.

-- 
Stefano Vaj