mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (11/02/84)
Is it the function of a moderator (or perhaps gatekeeper) to have the
last word on every issue? We have erratically been receiving fa.poli-sci
here (5 issues so far), and on over half of the items, this strange
character called JoSH has inserted a note disagreeing with the content
of the item. Some of the other fa groups have occasional editor's
comments, but always on matters of fact, or perhaps pointing to another
place where the same question has been discussed. In no other group
that I know does the moderator feel compelled to argue against every
item with which he disagrees. It is particularly bad in fa.poli-sci,
since this JoSH person has precisely the extreme black-white simplistic
view of the world against which many of the items warn.
A political moderator who just has to add his two-cents worth should
at least be sure it is worth two cents. It must cost more than that
in phone bills.
--
Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt
{uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsrgv!dciem!mmtbch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron Howes) (11/04/84)
Back in the olden days when us usenetters could participate actively in
fa.poli-sci we had to deal with JoSH's behavior. It is his view that
since he is moderating the digest, he gets first crack at any submission
which comes in. I suspect the only way to stop that would be to wrest
the moderatorship away from him. Since over the three or four years I've
been reading fa.poli-sci nobody seems to have bothered to try and do that
I guess it isn't worthwhile.
To be fair, JoSH is scrupulously fair in representing all sides of an issue
in his digests if you can hack the editorial comments. Were he truly an
autocrat, nothing but his own point of view would be reflected.
--
Byron C. Howes
...!{decvax,akgua}!mcnc!ecsvax!bch