Text 10207, 98 rader
Skriven 2004-11-30 11:10:30 av Philip Lozier (1:267/169)
   Kommentar till text 2467 av Paul Sanders (3:633/104)
Ärende: Moderating
==================
PL>>GOD bless America, and freedom of choice.
 PS> why limit it to America ?

God bless the world then, and hopefuly everybody has freedom of choice.

 PS>>> Ok, and we can then disregard any additional rules that the echo
 PS>>> moderator may deem necessary ?

PL>>Absolutely not.  In lieu of rules postings and/or a method of finding
PL>>particular rules for a particular echo, that is the rule of thumb.
 PS> Thats a good start :)

Common sense me thinks.

 PL>> If a moderator is doing their job properly, then the rules of any
 PL>> particualr ech should never be in question.

 PS> Who gets to decide if a moderator is doing thier job or
 PS> not ?
 PS> Do local conditions come into play with regard to the way
 PS> an echo is
 PS> moderated ?

I don't see where local conditions play... common sense is common sense
everywhere... if rules are expected to be followed, then the users must be made
aware of the rules. If a moderaotr has not posted these rules, then how can any
rules expect to be followed?  A moderator trying to enforce unposted rules is
no doing their job IMO.  If such a moderator came to me and said "this one did
this, or that", I want to see where the rules forbiding this or that have been
made publicly available where an echo user can be reasonably expected to know
these rules beyond "do not be excessively annoying, or too easily annoyed"

 PL>>>> The rest is proceedural policy for the nodes to worry about,
 PL>>>> not the end BBS user,

 PS>>> What of users who are moderators ?

Users simply need follow the rules of the BBS, and follow the rules files of
any echoes they participate in... there is no need for them to worry about
anything else.  In my view, FidoNEt echoes are supposed to be entertainment and
recreation for a user, not a burden.  As to moderators, they need to use common
sense.  Laziness doesn't produce a pleasurable echo.

As to users who are moderators... don't think it should have been allowed.  I
feel one wishing to moderate an echo should at least be a point.


 PS> Does the position of moderator (be they SysOp or user)
 PS> rate a mention
 PS> in any official fidonet documnet ?
 PS> If not, why should the position of moderator be limited
 PS> to fidonet
 PS> SysOps ?

Yea... there should have been a ratified echomail policy a long time ago.

PL>>>> My rules for echoes with my BBS users?  Follow the rules of the
PL>>>> echo you are in... what happened to:

PL>>>>Do not be excessively annoying...
PL>>>>Do not be easily annoyed.

PL>>I dunno... what happened to it?  Seems to be something everybody discussing
PL>>the topic has forgotten.
 PS> I got the impression that the above two rules where what
 PS> you went by,
 PS> with little reguard for echo rules, perhaps that was my
 PS> mistake.

Yes... that was a mistake... the rule of thumb I apply where there are no rules
posted regularly in the echo for users to be expected to follow.  I don't honor
rules made up on the fly by a moderator too lazy to post the rules, but I feel
so long as the rules have been posted, and the user can be resonably expected
to have seen them, that allsuch posted rules apply.

PL>>Single user systems might be bettter off sucking newsgroups through Outlook
PL>>Distress rather than telling BBS SysOps in FidoNet how they should run
PL>>their
PL>>systems... after all, with their view on things, they aren't much better
PL>>than that,and the kind of people Fido shouldn't have, want, or need in the
PL>>first place.

 PS> For the most part, this is a single user system (though I
 PS> do have
 PS> people telnet in from time to time) does your opinion
 PS> above include
 PS> me?

I would say not, as from what you describe you do have telnet available for
users.

My big fit is with non-SysOp systems attempting to preach what a BBS SysOp
should do.  They can lick my left one.

Phil

--- FMail/Win32 1.60
 * Origin: (1:267/169)