peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (02/02/90)
If both groups are going to be voted on, the question of moderation becomes
less important. The sci people would have a better chance of getting their
group passed if it was moderated, though, so it might be a good idea to try
it that way. Everyone wins.
--
_--_|\ Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <peter@ficc.uu.net>.
/ \
\_.--._/ Xenix Support -- it's not just a job, it's an adventure!
v "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton) (02/06/90)
In article <HXG1EN7xds13@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: >If both groups are going to be voted on, the question of moderation becomes >less important. The sci people would have a better chance of getting their >group passed if it was moderated, though, so it might be a good idea to try >it that way. Everyone wins. Not everyone. Some people want Objectivists to move certain postings out of certain other groups. A moderated group is almost completely useless from that point of view because a whole class of objectivists won't post to it.