On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 3:52 AM, Andy Powell <andy.powell_at_eduserv.org.uk> wrote:
> To be fair, I think Jean-Claude is primarily accusing you (Stevan)
> of summarising his arguments back to the list incorrectly rather
> than censorship per se,
No, actually I think he thought I had not posted his posting.
I think every poster, whether moderator or not, has the right to
summarize to postings of other posters, as he understands them, and to
criticize them as he sees fit (as long as the criticism is not ad
hominem, defamatory. libelous, or off-topic).
> then noting that having the role of both moderator and prime
> activist doesn't always sit comfortably.
As moderator all I do is keep the list on-topic, and filter out
flaming and spamming.
As poster, I do what everyone else on the list does: I express my own
views to the best of my ability and knowledge.
In this discussion, please let us separate the question of whether I
have, as moderator, suppressed relevant postings, from the question of
whether there is some sort of incompatibility between being moderator
and poster.
> On the few occassions that I posted to this list, I have tended
> to do so in response to (and sometimes in disagreement with)
> a post by Stevan and if I'm honest, I do find it odd that my post
> then has to wait for moderation by the person I'm arguing with.
Have any of your postings failed to appear?
> All of which leads to a very simple question... does this list
> actually need moderation?
Unless you want to see the dozens of spams that appear in my gmail box
every day, you better keep this a moderated list.
But I repeat, if there is a plurality opposed to my moderation, I am
happy to hand over to someone else.
Stevan Harnad
Received on Fri Oct 03 2008 - 12:08:47 BST