Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site Shasta.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!glacier!Shasta!gus
From: gus@Shasta.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.news.group,net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: A way to save net.sources.mac
Message-ID: <1562@Shasta.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 26-Nov-85 16:00:12 EST
Article-I.D.: Shasta.1562
Posted: Tue Nov 26 16:00:12 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 28-Nov-85 04:33:03 EST
References: <1308@teklds.UUCP> <183@sdcc7.UUCP>
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 17
Xref: watmath net.news.group:4715 net.micro.mac:3610

> 
> [ whining mode ]	"It's too much trouble to post to moderated groups."
> [ sensible mode ]	"Moderation introduces a lag into the posting process."
> [ silly blather mode ]	"Moderation is censorship.  Censorship is a bad thing.
> 			 Ergo, moderation is bad."
> 

My main objection to moderation is that it creates a bottleneck; either
mechanical or human. Everything done here is volunteer, so if the moderator
is snowed under with work, he may slack off for a few days on forwarding
postings. Such is the current case with INFO-MAC. Formerly, a new digest
would come out fairly regularly every few days. More recently, there
have been large gaps between postings, and those postings have been
relatively huge.

Even if the final volume is the same, it is simply better if the flow of
information is not hindered in any way.