Xref: utzoo comp.org.eff.talk:1292 news.misc:5942
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!apple!agate!pasteur!galileo.berkeley.edu!jbuck
From: jbuck@galileo.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,news.misc
Subject: Re: Caller ID:  Is comp.dcom.telecom biased?
Message-ID: <10590@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 30 Jan 91 01:00:29 GMT
References: <15377@milton.u.washington.edu> <1991Jan30.000852.10527@lavaca.uh.edu>
Sender: news@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: jbuck@galileo.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck)
Lines: 23

In article <1991Jan30.000852.10527@lavaca.uh.edu>, jet@karazm.math.uh.edu ("J. Eric Townsend") writes:
> 2. A new moderator could be found, but Townson knows a lot about this
> stuff, so it might not be easy to find someone as skilled.  Given
> ignorance or opinions, I'd prefer the former.  The only real job
> of a moderator is to keep the subject on the topic, correct?

That depends; on some moderated newsgroups, that's all the moderator does;
on others, the moderator's personality is strongly reflected throughout
(comp.risks, for example).  There's no rule about it.  Many of the groups
with dominant moderators evolved out of mailing lists, and when people
signed up for the mailing list, that's how it was (risks and telecom
both fit into this category); there's no reason to expect every moderated
group to be moderated the same way.

As for me, I'd choose opinions over ignorance any day of the week, even
though I often disagree with Townson.  I would prefer it if moderators
would restrain themselves from commenting on every little thing, though.
It's annoying.  It could be worse: he could insert bad puns after every
article like Peter Neumann does in comp.risks!

--
Joe Buck
jbuck@galileo.berkeley.edu	 {uunet,ucbvax}!galileo.berkeley.edu!jbuck