On 3 Mar 2007 03:52:59 -0800, "Nekojin" wrote:

I say:
You don't have to own a pond or anything to be in this discussion. The
moderators are well aware of the problems and think they have taken
adequate steps to address them.

such as?

Wetware.

I go on to say:
We feel that moderation on content
only will be sufficient to stifle the noise yet keep as open as
possible a discussion.

And yet look at NGP Carol slip right through their moderation process
and attacked a poster, pretending to be on topic. Can you please
inform us, on how you guys are planning to avoid her from doing this
on RPM?

Face it Galen, Carol been causing problems on news groups for 12
years. First on the health groups, then on the religion groups, and
now the ponds groups.

You are guys are creating a moderated group because of the backlash of
her behavior, and now you are creating a heaven for her to continue.

You've seen it. All of you are rewarding her action and her and
bigotry. If you create a group and allow her to continue you also
agree with her persecution of Jehovah's witnesses every where. Is that
the message you guys are conveying?

Perhaps we have different opinions about what moderation is to
accomplish. It is not flawless, nor do the moderators expect it to
be. Misteaks will be made. Posts that should obviously be approved
will be rejected, and posts that should obviously be rejected will be
approved. I may go to my grave deeply regretting one or more
decisions I have made. Then again, I'll bet I can get over it, given
time. Someone may even slip through a message attacking my dear,
departed, sainted mother. They probably won't be able to do it twice,
however. They certainly won't be able to make a habit of it. (On
second thought, they might, I *am* pretty stupid.)

So if you're expecting moderation to provide some kind of impenetrable
gateway, I concede already, it just isn't going to happen that way.

--
Galen Hekhuis
We'll cross that bridge when it rears its ugly head