[LINK] Moderator Censorship

[rene]

On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 18:29:56 +1100, Ivan Trundle wrote:

> On 27/03/2011, at 6:19 PM, rene wrote:
>
>> Imo the page should be changed to say something like: "While the
>> list is unmoderated in terms of who can subscribe to it, be warned
>> that the list has moderators who may publicly rebuke, reprimand or
>> censure posters if posters say something the moderator/s don't
>> like."
>
> If the introduction page is changed to the words above, I will
> rescind my list owner permissions (the term is used in the sense that
> Mailman suggests) and allow others to manage the list in whatever way
> they deem fit.
>
> The day that Link is moderated in any capacity is the day that I
> leave Link.

Then I suggest that you suggest to your fellow "list owners" that they do 
not post any messages with subject lines like "Moderation note:" or that 
contain any other use of the word moderation or moderator or owner in a 
context that has any potential to give subscribers and/or other readers the 
impression that list posts are subject to rebuke, reprimand or censure by 
"list owners". (NB: I am not asking you to say whether you will or won't do 
that).

I also suggest that people just ignore messages that purport to be 
"moderation notes" or appear to constitute censure etc by a "list owner", 
given at least one of the "list owner"s, as best I can make out, says the 
list is still not moderated in terms of what opinions/speech are allowed to 
be expressed. If my understanding in that regard is wrong, then I assume 
one of the "list owners" will publicly advise to the contrary.

Irene