Text 17511, 97 rader
Skriven 2007-08-19 18:26:01 av denebeim (3988.babylon5)
     Kommentar till en text av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Ärende: Re: Newsgroup back!
===========================
In article <1187463846.418050.29100@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>,
 <StarFuryG7@aol.com> wrote:
>> StarFur...@aol.com wrote:
>> >         Some months back when perusing the Internet for nothing in
>> > particular, I happened to notice that this group actually has a Page
>> > on Wikipedia, and it referenced criticism over censorship issues in
>> > relation to it. That didn't surprise me one bit, because regardless of
>> > what Amy or Matt may have to say on the matter right now, there are
>> > times when they make it a point to silence people.
>
>On Aug 18, 2:46 am, Matt Ion <soundy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> You really believe that's the case?
>
>        I believe it has been the case in the past. Things may have
>changed since then, however, but I notice the same people in charge of
>moderation.

That has *never* been the case.  The founders of this group are all
libertarians.  I firmly believe people should have the right to do
whatever they want as long as they don't hurt anyone else.  We let
anyone rant and rave and convince everyone what a loony jerk they are
until way after we start getting complaints as long as they don't
flame anyone.  It's not our job to prevent people from demonstrating
what an ass they are, if people don't like it they can killfile them.
It's our job to make sure that they don't flame other people and to
ensure that the killfiles work.  As long as you don't morph or flame
other people you can say whatever you want.

>> Go do a search for "Paul Harper".
>
>        The name is a little familiar.
>
>> Notice the extent of the madness he perpetrated based on his own
>> perceived persecution.
>
>        Perceived persecution?

We were telling people to use their killfiles all the time with him.
He got plenty of rope and Cheryl got plenty of grey hairs deciding
which side of the line he was on.  He liked to surf the line, which
we'll only put up with for so long, life is too short to put up with
assholes gaming the system.

>While I don't know exactly what his experience may have
>entailed without researching it, I wonder what kind of "private"
>messages may have ended up in his mailbox from moderators here.

Well, in fact there were no private messages.  The moderators always
reply to anything sent to them copying the moderator's mailing list.
Everything on that list is recorded for prosterity.  We used to give
whoever wanted read only access to it, never got any takers, it seems
like the people who accuse us of censorship never actually want to do
anything other than accuse us.

Just like all usenet controversy it was a tempest in a teapot.  When
you ask the detractors to actually do some research and find evidence
of their accusations they ignore you and continue to accuse.  For my
part, I figure that people will draw their own conclusions given the
behavior of the parties involved.  Of course given what's currently in
the oval office perhaps I'm being too generous towards people.  I
gotta stand by my beliefs though, as do most people.

>> Notice that he was never "banned" from the group, or "censored" outright.
>
>        That last part sounds as though you're hedging somewhat.

He means he was never banned from the newsgroup.  He was put on hand
moderation, just as you have been, because we figured that he was
likely to break the rules.

>> If you subsequently violate those terms, THEN YES, THE MESSAGE CAN BE
>> CENSORED.  Sorry, but no, you CANNOT always just "say what you're
>> thinking" in a moderated group.
>
>        Excuse me, but we're doing it right now, even though things
>have gotten nasty and personal. I don't see anyone attempting to shut
>you up despite your clear-cut arrogance in my direction.

Um, check the FAQ, we don't moderate for clear-cut arrogance, we
moderate flames and trolls.  This thread hasn't even gotten close to
where we'd start moderating.  We will keep an eye on it after this
point though.

>Maybe it's just that you favor double standards, especially when one
>of them favors you.

Um, looks to me like neither of you has had a post bounced yet.  How
is this favoring one party over the other?

Jay
-- 
* Jay Denebeim  Moderator       rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated *
* newsgroup submission address: b5mod@deepthot.org                *
* moderator contact address:    b5mod-request@deepthot.org        *
* personal contact address:     denebeim@deepthot.org             *
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)