Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation]
joe at andrieu.net
Thu Feb 1 10:58:36 PST 2007
Scott Reynen wrote:
> I'm not clear on the perceived damage of long-term
> moderation. If it
> allows the good stuff in and keeps the bad stuff out, I see
> no harm.
> If it's keeping good stuff out, I would be very interested in seeing
> some of this good stuff that was kept out, as it would cause me to
> question moderation itself, regardless of length.
The 15 messages that just landed in my inbox are not the best way to
have a conversation, especially as most of those messages are now out of
date and out of context. Andy clearly sent those during the
conversation and they were held for moderation.
They are, IMO, good stuff.
Moderation is a form of punishment, whether it is seen that way by the
cabal or not. It ostracizes the moderated and prevents them from
participating in the community like everyone else. In this case, it has
made Andy a second-class uF citizen whose posts are censored in an
ill-defined, unchecked process run by unnamed moderators. I say unnamed
because although we know some of the moderators, unnamed others have
apparently joined the effort as a means of spreading the governance
beyond the founding cabal. That's progress, but these new volunteers
have remained anonymous. Kind of like the secret police, really.
Since this censorship judgment was issued by dictatorial fiat at a point
when Andy was agitating over governance issues, I found it particularly
disingenuous. That it has continued as long as it has only buttresses my
concerns about governance. Obviously, the cabal has the power to do
this thing. However, I remain unconvinced that this instance is not
simply an abuse of that power.
I would appreciate it if someone could forward me the "bad" posts that
have justified Andy's continued moderation. In the face of the good
posts, there needs to be some non-zero level of bad posts to justify
continued moderation. Perhaps there is merit to the moderation. If so,
I think it is appropriate for evidence to be shared with those in the
community who care to review it.
Or, if taking Andy off moderation has simply been overlooked, ok.
Mistakes happen. In which case he should be allowed to post normally and
we should remember as a community that we don't have the wherewithal to
manage fine-tuned corrective procedures.
joe at andrieu.net
+1 (805) 705-8651
More information about the microformats-discuss