I've also made an offline suggestion to Terry, but want to endorse
publically Ted's suggestion and Shuan's notrion of a warning, though I would
keep the warning private. Further, I would trust the good judgment of the
moderator on his own to cut off anyone who is on a rampage until that person
has come to his senses and can convince the moderator he will not behave
badly.
Bob Schneider
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shuan Rose" <shuanr@boo.net>
To: "Ted Davis" <tdavis@messiah.edu>; <Asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 9:02 AM
Subject: RE: moderated list?
>
> I have already made my offline suggestion to Terry, but I would second
this
> alternative. I would add that the offender should be given a private
> warning, a public warning, then "Plonk".
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
> Behalf Of Ted Davis
> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 8:06 AM
> To: Asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: moderated list?
>
>
> I've already made my suggestion to Terry, but I'll restate it here. I
> recommend that, in lieu of a fully moderated listserve (which will be a
lot
> of work for someone and reduce the *good* kind of spontaneous exchanges),
> that we have a "death penalty." In this scenario there is a moderator,
but
> her/his role in this case is simply to "kill" a subscriber who is
repeatedly
> out of line. The moderator makes that call, in response to complaints
sent
> privately to the moderator by subscribers. I don't think this would
happen
> often, but it certainly would have happened already a few times. For
> example, we wouldn't have had to put up with the "scientific proof of God"
> for more than a couple of days, and name calling can be halted abruptly.
>
> Ted Davis
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 24 2002 - 09:40:03 EDT