Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!bloom-beacon!bu.edu!bu-cs!snorkelwacker!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!APEE.OGI.EDU!mehuld From: mehuld@APEE.OGI.EDU (Mehul Dave) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: talk.philosophy.objectivism Message-ID: <9001190353.AA01540@apee.ogi.edu> Date: 19 Jan 90 03:53:21 GMT References: <1990Jan13.140242.14111@twwells.com> <9001140024.AA18363@apee.ogi.edu> <9001142226.AA23247@apee.ogi.edu> <1990Jan17.075631.853@twwells.com> Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute (formerly OGC), Beaverton, OR Lines: 55 In article <1990Jan17.075631.853@twwells.com> bill@twwells.com (T. William Wells) writes >: And yet >: to expect us to believe that you will not edit off our views? >Yes, I expect you to believe that. Why? If for no other reason >that, were I to reject them or edit them, you could post on other >newsgroups complaining about this, thus discrediting me as >moderator. I have no intention of going through all that trouble. It has been observed by other posters that moderators on USENET have very wide powers and it is not easy to get a moderator off the newsgroup. Besides, I would not want to cross post my articles to other newsgroups when there is already a newsgroup for Objectivism. >At least two people have suggested co-moderation, which is to say, >two people, presumably myself and someone acceptable to you, as >moderators. I'd accept that. I would not. Let me repeat my opposition. I am opposed primarily to the idea of *anyone* moderating the proposed objectivism newsgroup. I am also opposed to you in particular as a moderator. The reason I am opposed to any moderation has been reiterated by many posters. It is best to let each individual decide what is consistent with Objectivism and what is not. It appears as though you don't seem to think that the readers of USENET are capable of doing this. >: Besides, Mr. Wells did not even post a charter for the proposed >: newsgroup. What is it supposed to discuss? Specifically, is it all >: of objectivism or only parts of it? >From the original posting: >: This newsgroup would exist for >: discussion of Objectivism, the philosophy of Ayn Rand, and >: related topics. >Looks like a charter to me. And, to answer your question: all of >it. Is this your idea of a charter? I would have at least expected a summary of the key principles of Objectivism which would set the frame work for any new participant in the newsgroup. I would further expect that some qualifications be made such as whether the newsgroup is for studying Objectivism in detail from the view of a formal study or a free-wheeling discussion. I think it should be for the former i.e. discussion of technical aspects of Objectivism and which is why the newsgroup should be called sci.philosophy.objectivism. -- --Mehul Dave-- (INTERNET :- mehuld@apee.ogi.edu) "To the banner of life, all could be given, even life itself" -- Ayn Rand