[net.women] How about mod.women?

mokhtar@ubc-vision.CDN (mokhtar) (10/13/84)

------------------
   
Is there a "mod.women" newsgroup? Wouldn't that be better than a private 
mailing list? Everybody would be able to read it or not read it at any time
only the submissions would first go to a moderator, just like what has been
done with "net.motss". 
It would add to the readership of the group if nothing else. Ofcourse
"net.women" would still be there for those who don't want to go thru a
moderator. Just an idea.
						       Farzin Mokhtarian
						       < ubc-vision!mokhtar >

rh@mit-eddie.UUCP (Randy Haskins) (10/17/84)

>    Is there a "mod.women" newsgroup? Wouldn't that be better
>    than a private mailing list? Everybody would be able to read
>    it or not read it at any time only the submissions would
>    first go to a moderator, just like what has been done with
>    "net.motss".

While the main reason for the creation of the mailing list was
so not everyone would be allowed write access, I think that it
probably influences the behavior of the people on the list to
know that not everyone has read access, also.  I have no idea
what they discuss in the net.women.only mailing list, but I get
the feeling that it's probably not terribly interesting to men.
-- 
Randwulf  (Randy Haskins);  Path= genrad!mit-eddie!rh

phil@amd.UUCP (Phil Ngai) (10/17/84)

> know that not everyone has read access, also.  I have no idea
> what they discuss in the net.women.only mailing list, but I get
> the feeling that it's probably not terribly interesting to men.

Actually, it's been quite interesting.


a charter member of the mailing list,
-- 

 Phil Ngai (408) 982-6554
 UUCPnet: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra,intelca}!amd!phil
 ARPAnet: amd!phil@decwrl.ARPA

dmmartindale@watcgl.UUCP (Dave Martindale) (10/19/84)

The BIGGEST difference between net.women and the mailing list, I think,
is that there is the impression that everyone on the mailing list seems
to behave as if they have a responsibility to other members of the
list.  Everyone seems to care that their submissions are generally
useful to the others on the list.  No name-calling.  No pointless
drivel.

(To be fair, I don't know how much of this impression is due to the
"moderator" filtering out inappropriate material, and how much to the
attitude of the members themselves - though I suspect it is mostly the
latter.  The reasons don't matter as much as the fact that the
atmosphere IS different).

The atmosphere in which the discussion occurs is (approximately) one of
mutual caring and responsibility rather than one in which the
participants are intent on asserting their "right" to say whatever they
want, regardless of the feelings or desires of other participants.  The
latter attitude is one I see often on USENET, including in these
groups.

It is much easier to be open about one's own experiences, and to
discuss things calmly, in the atmosphere provided by the mailing list.

I expect a moderated group to provide an atmosphere somewhere between
that of the current groups and the mailing list in friendliness.

	Dave Martindale