Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!rutgers!texbell!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Moderation (Re: SCI.philosophy.objectivism) Message-ID: <.1J1O5Cxds13@ficc.uu.net> Date: 4 Feb 90 12:17:52 GMT References: <7450@tank.uchicago.edu> <9002040025.AA12193@apee.ogi.edu> Reply-To: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 15 In article <9002040025.AA12193@apee.ogi.edu> mehuld@APEE.OGI.EDU (Mehul Dave) writes: > Please note that the so called "sci diehards" (of whom I happen to be > one) have vigorously opposed *any* moderation. If our purpose was not > to welcome any dissent or criticism, we would have actively supported > moderation. What does toleration of dissent or criticism have to do with moderation? There have been plenty of cases where moderators have posted messages highly critical of themselves... let alone the subject matter of the group or their personal opinions. Have a look at comp.dcom.telecom some time. A paragon of moderated groups. Of course you need the *right* moderator. From evidence in this group I'd suggest T. William Wells. He seems the only objectivist with a truly open mind. -- _--_|\ Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. . / \ \_.--._/ Xenix Support -- it's not just a job, it's an adventure! v "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'