Re: tlug: The whole affair

[Kei Furuuchi <kfur@example.com>]

I can't quite follow the elaboration of arguments here.
But, it seems that the issue is weighing between freedom of expression 
and public benefit. So it seems it looks like tv rating and v-chip
argument. so I recommend to come up with self rating system like tv
rating in USA like "TLUG 14 EL" meaning newbie with 14 days exprience
with tlug needs guidance, explicit language, etc.

Rgds,
Kei.


Stephen J. Turnbull writes:
 > >>>>> "Jonathan" == Jonathan Byrne <- 3Web <jq@example.com>> writes:
 > 
 >     Jonathan> On Tue, 11 Aug 1998, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
 > 
 >     >> Unmoderated lists and newsgroups, issues like this are normally
 >     >> discussed in-band.
 > 
 >     Jonathan> If I'm not mistaken, tlug-admin is not a closed list,
 >     Jonathan> but a list separated for the purpose of discussing
 >     Jonathan> administrative (rather than Linux/UNIX) issues, so that
 >     Jonathan> is not really a matter of "persons of power."  Nothing
 >     Jonathan> is done in secret.  Anyone can subsribe, AFAIK. This is
 >     Jonathan> a quote from the TLUG web site:
 > 
 > This isn't the issue; that the memberships are different is.  People
 > who are on A but not B won't see the discussion if it's moved to B,
 > although this kind of policy is relevant to all readers and posters.
 > People who are on B but not A don't care.  The relevant place for
 > discussing content policy on A is A.
 > 
 > For example, somebody (Rob, I think) pointed out that there is a big
 > difference between a private email and a post, and a bigger difference
 > between a post and a (quasi-)official meeting announcement.  Doh, of
 > course, but I didn't think about that, and I would not have seen that
 > post had the discussion taken place on tlug-admin.
 > 
 > I think that that kind of education should take place on any ML when
 > the context is appropriate.  Even if the student is (embarrassingly
 > enough) me.
 > 
 >     Jonathan> "The TLUG-admin mailing list is also archived. It is
 >     Jonathan> used for discussion related to the administration of
 >     Jonathan> TLUG financial affairs, upcoming events, maintaining the
 >     Jonathan> server, and other topics not suited to the main list. "
 > 
 > Yes, "other topics" captures the "moderation" policy, but "moderation"
 > policy is not very close to "financial affairs, upcoming events,
 > maintaining the server".
 > 
 >     Jonathan> My suggestion was based on the belief that the Jive
 >     Jonathan> issue was sufficiently flogged and had grown
 >     Jonathan> sufficiently removed from the topic of Linux that it had
 >     Jonathan> indeed become an administrative issue, and should
 > 
 > No.  If it's an administrative issue, then it's an issue of "people
 > with power" == administrators, even if any one can become a person of
 > power simply by subscribing to a mailing list.  This kind of policy
 > discussion should go out of band only when one is advising a newbie
 > about the rules of the road, or when there is a specific statement
 > that policy discussion takes place on list B.
 > 
 >     Jonathan> therefore be on the administrative list.  Anyone may
 >     Jonathan> subscribe to that list and participate.  "Open Source
 >     Jonathan> and Open Policies, Openly Arrived at" :-)
 > 
 > I am not subscribed to tlug-admin, and don't intend to, because I'm
 > not interested in the specific topics assigned to the list.
 > news.admin.policy (if it hasn't mutated) addresses a different kind of 
 > problem; newgroup content is still normally discussed in the groups
 > unless there is a moderator.
 > 
 >     Jonathan> Regarding b), the fact that something is pure flame
 >     Jonathan> doesn't mean that some people don't feel that it's
 >     Jonathan> unnecessary.
 > 
 > It's not an a question of "some people feel it unnecessary" simply
 > because it only takes one person who feels it to be necessary to
 > continue the thread :-)
 > 
 >     Jonathan> I apologize if I gave anyone the impression that I
 >     Jonathan> thought the discussion should take place among "persons
 >     Jonathan> of power," but I did and do believe it had become
 > 
 > I posted my response because I knew that, and believe that your
 > suggestion would have effects contrary to your clear intention.
 > 
 >     Jonathan> irrelevant to the main list, had gone on too long, and
 >     Jonathan> was showing signs of moving from discussion to fight, so
 >     Jonathan> I stand by my suggestion that it was best taken away
 >     Jonathan> from the main list.
 > 
 >     Jonathan> And of course, if this needs any more discussion, I
 >     Jonathan> think that should also be done on tlug-admin :-)
 > 
 > Not if I'm going to participate, for the reason mentioned above.  So
 > I'm replying here.
 > 
 > -- 
 > University of Tsukuba                Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
 > Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences        Tel/fax: +1 (298) 53-5091
 > --------------------------------------------------------------
 > Next Nomikai: 18 September, 19:30 Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691
 > Next Meeting: October, Tokyo Station Yaesu central gate 12:30
 > --------------------------------------------------------------
 > Sponsor: PHT, makers of TurboLinux http://www.pht.co.jp
--------------------------------------------------------------
Next Nomikai: 18 September, 19:30 Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691
Next Meeting: October, Tokyo Station Yaesu central gate 12:30
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsor: PHT, makers of TurboLinux http://www.pht.co.jp