Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 20:37:42 EST
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: David Clarkson <Dvdclarksn@AOL.COM>
Subject: Vanagon List Moderator-let's get things underway!
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
I second your motion Dylan. The list needs an unbiased controlling hand. I
personally am not aware or informed of any existing charter or set of bylaws
that pertain to the actual moderation process. Again, I speak potentially from
my own ignorance. Lets begin from the beginning, so to speak and see if we
can proceed in an orderly manner to democratically elect a moderator with votes
from all of the 1000 or so listees having an opportunity to vote on the
matter. Is there a cyber-friendly method of using something akin to "Robert's
Rules of Order" to facilitate an effective choice for this very important and
formative point in the list's evolution?
In a message dated 1/14/2009 12:28:40 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Please don't be sorry.
This needs to talked about and something done about it.
We have lost many knowledgeable listees due to no or weak moderation.
This is the Vanagon list.
I vote for just Vanagon content.
NVC gets put into a separate folder on my computer and I check it about once
every two weeks.
The size of the folder grows far to quickily IMHO.
I belong to over 30 groups and this particular group is the only one with
such issues occuring as frequently as they do.
Other lists ban "non content" posters after one warning.
Any finger pointing or bad mouthing ends with all parties removed from the
These lists are excellent for sharing info.
I find myself using pmail far more than ever now.
This is unfortunate for the lurkers.
Speak up people or we may loose more and more of the the listees with true
experience and the answers needed.
How about coming up with a list of likely canidates and having a vote?
From: Michael Sullivan <sandwichhead@GMAIL.COM>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 11:22:41 AM
Subject: Re: Vanagon List Moderator
Sorry to start this thread, guys.
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:02 AM, pickle vanagon
> Unfortunately, I think it is clear that this list does require a moderator.
> Recently, some messages have been downright spam. I think if you were
> to be the moderator, you would need to be prepared to err on the side of
> caution in your own posts for that period. It would not look good if the
> moderator was responsible for some of the questionable emails on the
> list---even if they are a little bit related to vanagons.
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 7:41 AM, BenT . <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Robert,
> > Let clarify my point. I do not necessarily want THE job. However, I would
> > like the job done. So far nobody has stepped up to the plate. Picking a
> > moderator from a "show of hands" is not exactly my idea. That was Jim's.
> > Though I think he is looking more for opinions on whether any moderating
> > even necessary. I moderate a few other groups now. So far we do not have
> > sort of issues we have here or even the type of constraint in more
> > controlled groups.
> > For the record, you might notice that most of my jesting w/ Mike Miller
> > usually related to some Vanagon themed activity. For example, the recent
> > postings about burning things at the beach is about activities for
> > Burningvan this Saturday. We have found in the past that friendly banter
> > the List just before the event results in improved attendance.
> > Thanks for your opinion. I hope this thread can start us back on the
> > of sanity or insanity as the case may be. At the rate that things were
> > last week, we were going everywhere w/o clear direction.
> > Cheers,
> > BenT
> > ------Original Message------
> > From: Robert Fisher
> > Sender: Vanagon Mailing List
> > To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> > ReplyTo: Robert Fisher
> > Sent: Jan 14, 2009 3:52 AM
> > Subject: Re: Vanagon List Moderator
> > --snip--
> > Anyway, please share our thoughts about this. Pmail if necessary.
> > --snip--
> > Two thoughts came immediately to mind: The first was 'Jonas's First Law
> > electoral politics': What disqualifies a person for the leader's job is
> > that
> > he or she wants it.
> > The second was about those occasional but lengthy barrages of non-vanagon
> > related inside jokes that you and Mike Miller indulge in, especially
> > this time of year. Talk about wearing out the delete key.
> > I have nothing against you personally but I don't think that picking from
> > show of hands is the way to go about this.
> > If we are going to have a moderator (and we should probably have a
> > moderator) I'd be inclined to have a slightly more formalized structure
> > the form of an elected council or board (of say, nine people) who would
> > then
> > appoint a moderator and an 'assistant moderator' (as a standby/fill-in)
> > from
> > amongst themselves; those two individuals would then be disqualified from
> > being the head of council or board chair (*). This council would also set
> > policy (as in the charter) and perform various other administrative
> > functions that you find in most large human organizations.
> > The problem with even benevolent dictatorships, as was demonstrated so
> > clearly with Jim, is that they inevitably generate resentment in both the
> > governor and the governed. I think that recreating that situation is just
> > begging for more of the same problems down the road. Having a small
> > representative body should take a good deal of that pressure off of the
> > individual moderating. On the other hand, if he or she screwed up they
> > would
> > have the ability to can them if necessary, which isn't possible with
> > holding all the keys. (See * above.)
> > Cya,
> > Robert
> > Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
Michael in San Antonio
91GL AT 'Gringo'
**************Inauguration '09: Get complete coverage from the nation's