Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!pacbell!att!cbnewsj!ecl
From: ecl@cbnewsj.ATT.COM (Evelyn C. Leeper)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.arts.cinema: moderated or not?
Message-ID: <3596@cbnewsj.ATT.COM>
Date: 24 Jan 90 02:35:34 GMT
References: <11108@attctc.Dallas.TX.US>
Reply-To: ecl@cbnewsj.ATT.COM (Evelyn C. Leeper)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 26

In article <11108@attctc.Dallas.TX.US> rissa@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Patricia O Tuama) writes:
> In article <14161@fluke.COM> moriarty@tc.fluke.COM (Jeff Meyer) writes:
> >In summary, I'd have to say that I'll continue to read (and to post) to
> >rec.arts.movies, and that I'll vote yes for rec.arts.cinema (or any sensible
> >name), moderated or not, with the provision that we could turn it into a
> >moderated group later on.
> 
> Well, yes, that was my suggestion, offered as a compromise in an ef-
> fort to reach a group concensus on the moderation issue.  Unfortunate-
> ly Joel Levin decided concensus wasn't necessary.

If by consensus you mean unanimity, we are not going to reach it.  (Sometimes I
think that on the Net if you said the sun was farther away than the moon, you'd
get an argument!)  It is obvious (well, to me anyway) that there are those who
think this group should start out moderated, and those who think it should
start unmoderated.  None of the arguments being presented is getting anyone to
change his or her mind.  If we wait for consensus, we'll all be in that big
movie theatre in the sky before r.a.c gets going.

If by consensus you mean general agreement, it seems to me that the only way to
determine that is by a vote.  And that's just what Joel is doing.

Evelyn C. Leeper  |  +1 201-957-2070  |  att!mtgzy!ecl or  ecl@mtgzy.att.com
--
If I am not for myself, who is for me?  If I am only for myself what am I?
And if not now, when?  --Hillel