Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!bbn!bbn.com!rshapiro
From: rshapiro@bbn.com (Richard Shapiro)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: REC.ARTS.CINEMA -- drawing the discussion to a close?
Message-ID: <50754@bbn.COM>
Date: 11 Jan 90 14:35:16 GMT
References: <10938@attctc.Dallas.TX.US>
Sender: news@bbn.COM
Reply-To: rshapiro@BBN.COM (Richard Shapiro)
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Lines: 23

In article <10938@attctc.Dallas.TX.US> rissa@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Patricia O Tuama) writes:
>Richard, you have heard plenty of good arguments against moderating
>this or any other rec.* group including several from me.  You came 
>into this discussion determined to have a moderated group and you 
>have dismissed or ignored anyone who questioned or protested your 
>decision.  



What I heard from Trish were a few vague and amorphous arguments
against *any* "non-technical" moderated groups. I asked her explicitly
to present her arguments on news.groups but she declined to do so.
Furthermore, I've already addressed the (non) argument which says "all
moderated groups are Evil unless the group is technical", both on
news.groups and in email to Trish. There was no response on either
forum (except the empty, accusatory one above). 

I came into this discussion hoping to form a new group. The arguments
for moderation have been much more substantial than the arguments
against. It's all on the record, Trish. Have a look.


rs