[LINK] Moderation note: Attempting to suppress discussion or opinions (Match Koltai - Was Fukushima scaremongers becoming increasingly desperate)

Tom Koltai tomk at unwired.com.au
Mon Mar 28 02:38:40 AEDT 2011

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robin Whittle [mailto:rw at firstpr.com.au] 
> Sent: Saturday, 26 March 2011 10:03 PM
> To: link at anu.edu.au
> Cc: Tom Koltai; Martin Barry; Ivan Trundle
> Subject: Moderation note: Attempting to suppress discussion 
> or opinions (Match Koltai - Was Fukushima scaremongers 
> becoming increasingly desperate)
> Hi Tom,
> This is a note from me as one of the three Link List owners, 
> without having checked with them, so it's not authoritative.  
> If the other two Amigos - Martin Barry and Ivan Trundle - 
> think differently about this, then their decision will prevail.
> You wrote, in part:
> > Now could we stop discussing it, please. Or could we move 
> this rather 
> > moribund discussion to alt.rec.henny.penny
> I think it is unreasonable of you or anyone else on the list 
> to argue or assert in such a dismissive fashion that any 
> particular subject shouldn't be discussed on Link.
> I think your objection is not to the subject, but to the 
> expression of opinions, arguments etc. which are contrary to 
> your own.  So my impression of your actions are that you are 
> using the list in an attempt to malign the opinions of List 
> Members whose views are contrary to your own - by asserting 
> that they are not worthy of being expressed on the list.
> You are not required to discuss this or any other subject.  
> If you believe it is off topic, then you can set an example 
> to other list members by not writing to the list about it.
> I would consider it bad form for list members to write 
> privately to any other list members discouraging them from 
> posting, except in the most polite and constructive manner.  
> To do so in a way which is dismissive, condescending, 
> intimidating or which gives them the impression that your 
> attempt to dissuade them from writing has something to do 
> with their opinion, rather than about the topic being 
> suitable for Link, would likewise be at odds with what I (and 
> I guess the other two Amigos) expect from Link list members.
> Link has survived this far with little or nothing regarding 
> formal declaration of what is in scope, what sort of 
> discussions may take place etc.  I am not suggesting this 
> should change.
> I am saying that in my view, list members should support 
> other list members in expressing their views constructively 
> and respectfully on the list.
> If you think something is off-topic, then by all means write 
> to this effect, respectfully and constructively - on the 
> list, to the author's privately and/or to the List Owners.
> We Three Amigos are the final arbiters of what is on-topic 
> for Link.  My view is that many mailing lists are being used 
> to discuss the Japanese nuclear crisis and that its fine for 
> Link to be used for this too.
> I can't rule out that we Three Amigos *might* decide that 
> certain opinions may not be expressed on the list, but I find 
> it hard to imagine what such opinions would be.  I am sure 
> that the other two Amigos would not be in flavour of banning 
> or discouraging the expression of opinions such as "3 or 4 
> burnt, exploded or otherwise damaged nuclear reactors are a 
> serious concern".
> Please don't write to the list trying to discourage other 
> list members from discussing any particular subject, or 
> expressing any particular opinion.
>   - Robin

More information about the Link mailing list