Re: [atlarge-discuss] list confrontation(s)

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 06:24 p.m. 9/06/2003, James S. Tyre wrote:
 >To put this in perspective, I'm really thinking more about the 
possibility of abuse by those  >who seek to disrupt (surely not me).

Yes, that's the only reason why we bother to write such elaborate rules. I 
have experienced  how a saboteur can use the rules against those who want 
to be productive.
It is a Sysiphus labor to try and refine the rules more and more for clever 
disrupters to find more loopholes.
The moderator must use some subjective judgement and that is why he must be 
elected and can be kicked out.
I would favour a rotating list moderator, just like we now have a rotating 
Panel Chair.
The burden must be spread, everyone carrying his/her bit of the load.

> "a.  When an allegedly false statement is made, each member who knows 
> otherwise has the right to challenge the statement with the comment FALSE 
> or PLEASE RETRACT.  However, the member being challenged may ignore the 
> challenge without fear of repercussion unless the challenging member 
> quotes the exact statement being challenged and states the basis on which 
> the challenging member knows the statement to be false."
Yes, that *is* better. I will add all improvements and post the result in 
the Forum.

Thanks.


--Joop--
Chair icannatlarge Panel


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de