From: Terry M. Gray (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Jan 24 2003 - 15:57:47 EST
I want to take a poll of active members (and perhaps motivated
lurkers). Until such a time as I can get the new software that I plan
to use installed, we have two choices:
1. Unmoderated list with faster turn around on posts with the
negative side-effect of some spam (not all) coming through. (You will
be responsible to manage your own spam.)
2. Moderated list with longer turn-around times on posts (usually
approvals happening once or twice a day--occasional longer delays
depending on my circumstances) with the positive side-effect of no
Please respond to me directly and not the list with your vote 1 or 2.
I stopped moderating because I felt like my delays in approving posts
was posing a serious bottleneck in the discussion. Clearly, the tempo
of discussion has picked up (whether quality has is not clear). But,
also the amount of spam has picked up.
The new software should take care of this dilemma, but I'm not sure
when I will get to making the transition.
BTW, I don't mind moderating, it's just that I can't commit to
instant turn-around. Moderating takes about 10-20 seconds extra
(besides reading the post which I do anyway). So the time demand
isn't that great, it's just the timeliness demand. I personally think
that slowing down the discussion always improves it, but not everyone
agrees with that.
I'll take responses for a few days and then make a decision based on
the majority response.
-- _________________ Terry M. Gray, Ph.D., Computer Support Scientist Chemistry Department, Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 email@example.com http://www.chm.colostate.edu/~grayt/ phone: 970-491-7003 fax: 970-491-1801
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jan 24 2003 - 15:55:50 EST