From: Ben Goertzel (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Sep 12 2002 - 11:19:01 MDT
> Ben Goertzel wrote:
> > But, I know that if I want to impose my own standards on a list, I can
> > start my own list, and I don't want to take the time...
> And yet for some reason you are subscribed to SL4 and not wta-talk,
> Extropians, or any of the other lists out there. Perhaps you believe my
> sniper style of moderation has nothing to do with this and
> interferes with
> the better list SL4 would otherwise be; just as conscientous
> objectors may
> genuinely believe that the world would be a better place if their
> country's militaries disbanded, and the soldiers of those countries may
> respect the concept of satyagraha even if they cannot believe in it
> personally. I guess the moral is that it doesn't hurt if some people are
> conscientous objectors in the war on idiocy, and it may even be a good
> thing, as long as someone is still actually defending the borders.
I'm not subscribed to Extropians because the volume is too high, and there's
too much chat on contemporary politics, much of it from a perspective
(extreme libertarianism) that bores me.
I very much appreciate the fact that this is a moderated list. Some
unmoderated lists are very good, of course, but those tend to be on narrow
tech topics, which don't attract many people in the first place. I think
that a moderated list is appropriate for a topic like this, which
potentially appeals to a huge group of people.
If I ran a futurist/Singularitiarian list it would also be moderated, and
along roughly the same lines as you moderate your list. So, I generally
think your style of moderation is quite good.
My personal style, however, would be perhaps 30% less stringent than yours.
I would certainly issue warnings to people before banning them from posting,
but I know that takes extra effort, and I also know that you've done that at
least in some cases.
Anyway, I didn't mean to imply that I had a general problem with how you run
the list; I just disagree with some of your particular decisions, as is to
In particular -- thinking thru your most recent bans -- I find I miss Mike
(and the elusive Donna) Deering's excellent & insightful sense of humor on
Some of your bans I found 100% appropriate, of course. I'm not going to
bother to name names ;->
-- Ben G
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:41 MDT