Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ukma!rutgers!umn-d-ub!cs.umn.edu!hougen
From: hougen@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu (Dean Hougen)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.arts.erotica - update
Summary: a no vote for censorship
Keywords: moderator, not censor
Message-ID: <1990Feb11.062431.2713@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu>
Date: 11 Feb 90 06:24:31 GMT
References: <25D18E58.3C58@telly.on.ca> <1990Feb9.142322.19719@relay.nswc.navy.mil> <80O1+45xds13@ficc.uu.net>
Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis - CSCI Dept.
Lines: 31



Will rec.arts.erotica (or eros, if you want, who cares?) be censored?

Of course, that was the idea of having it moderated.  Only stories.  
No discussion.  No flames.  Just stories.

But beyond limiting the content to only stories, will the group be
censored by the moderator?

It will if he tries to label "offensive" stories, or ROT-13 them, or
even if he simply tries to cut out stories which do not fit his 
definition of erotica (e.g. the detective story example previously
mentioned).  Anything done in an attempt to limit the readership of
a particular story that is not done to the rest of the stories will
effectively (perhaps not completely) censor that story.  One wo/man's
erotica is another wo/man's offensive trash.  And who can say whether
a story is a detective story or a subtle erotic message?  And what  
happens if the moderator slips-up and misses the hidden "offensive"
message in a particular story?  

IMHO, the moderator should limit himself to cutting out only non-stories.
That way the authors determine the content of the newsgroup, and those
who are easily offended are forwarned that they are reading at their own
risk.  You could ROT-13 all the stories just to make sure no one read
something offensive (god forbid) by accident.  But don't let one person,
no matter how much you may agree with him or her, define erotica.

Dean Hougen
--
"Move over rover, let Jimi take over."  - Jimi Hendrix