Xref: utzoo news.groups:16368 rec.arts.movies:28453
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!texbell!vector!attctc!rissa
From: rissa@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Patricia O Tuama)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: rec.arts.cinema: moderated or not?
Message-ID: <10980@attctc.Dallas.TX.US>
Date: 14 Jan 90 05:47:47 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Lone Star Cafe
Lines: 29

In article <32941@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> steves@rat.cica.indiana.edu (Steve Scher) writes:
>I find it hard to believe that people would change their vote for/against a
>group just because it is moderated.  

Because many of us believe very strongly that without concrete, de-
monstrable proof that moderation is absolutely essential, no news-
group should be moderated.  If you want a nice neat clean sanitized 
network with nice neat clean sanitized newsgroups then go subscribe 
to CompuServe or some other service.  And if you want nice neat clean 
informed well-written and well-edited articles brimming with clearly 
presented information then go subscribe to a few film journals or go
to the library.  And besides, you get photographs with the journals.

Usenet is for us -- it's for individuals to express their opinions,
ideas and thoughts.  Moderation restricts that, it's always a subtle 
psychological presence and at times it's outright censorship.  I'm
not saying that moderation is never appropriate, I'm saying that we 
should not resort to it unless it's absolutely necessary.  


	I find it even harder to believe that the
>name would affect people's votes. 

Yeah, me too.  

					yours for nets & mods,

						      .
					t r i s h a   o t u a m a