Re: Anagram for Topica
Derek wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: <euman at bellsouth.net>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: Re: Anagram for Topica
>
>
> On 29 Aug 2003 at 21:44, Juergen Luethje wrote:
>
>> Euman wrote:
>>
>>> 3) integrated spam control (Moderated forum)
>>> (I wont allow Off-topic discussion in a forum topic,
>>
>> Off-topic != spam
>
> I can tell you havent even seen the site so how the hek would you
> know what Im talking about...
Now now kiddies, let's all try to get along, okay? Saying bad words
won't help any of us just now.
There is another way to approach this. One could show that both
positions are equally valid and reasonable. Just a bit
more tolerance and willingness to understand what we are saying.
You are right, of course.
euman:
"integrated spam control (Moderated forum)
(I wont allow Off-topic discussion in a forum topic..."
One view of 'spam' is that it is unsolicited content in the context of
the recipient. Thus "off topic" content could be seen as 'spam'. However
the exact same content IN ANOTHER CONTEXT (a.k.a. a different topic) is
not spam. So maybe what euman could do is once a message has been
evaluated as 'off topic', it can be moved to the most appropriate
(existing) topic area. And as there already exists a topic area called
'Off Topic Discussion', there exists a catch-all for all messages. And
depending on legal and moral standards, one could also create a topic
area called 'Potentially Offensive Material'.
It looked to me, that Euman thinks 'spam' and 'off-topic post' are
synonymous. That's why I just made the side note: "Off-topic != spam".
>>> I'll delete it
>>> This what you wrote and Im writing would be removed and considered
>>> off-topic.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> I see. You are using the possibility to post off-topic here, in order to
>> tell us, that your forum has the advantage, that there are no off-topic
>> posts possible, right?
Euman has a point here. His site does allow off topic discussions - but only
if they are in the 'Off Topic Discussion' area.
I had forgotten about his 'Off Topic Discussion' area. What I wanted to
say is this: In order to tell here repeatedly, that he will delete
off-topic posts (OK, not on the whole website, only in all but one areas),
he puts off-topic posts _here_.
(Please notice, that he himself regards his contributions here relating
to this as off-topic -- see ^^^^ above.)
This is at least paradoxical, no?
Juergen also has a point.
How does something get deemed as off-topic? As this site is run and controlled
only by Euman, I guess there is the answer. Also, what happens to a message
sent to the 'Off Topic Discussion' area that is actually concerned with
'X-Windows'. Euman will that be deleted or moved to the more appropriate area
- as technically it is off-topic in the context of the 'Off Topic
Discussion' area.
> I can tell you havent even seen the site
That's simply untrue, BTW. He should take his crystal ball back to the
shop. 
> so how the hek would you know what Im talking about...
And how is this sort of response going to encourage people, let alone
Juergen, to visit your site? Maybe instead you could describe your
site's approach to topic segregation.
>> BTW: You know what freedom of speech is?
>
> Yeah, I took an Oath to protect my Country from threat, Foreign and Domestic,
> this includes all rights under the Constitution, and for that you're Welcome.
Hmmmm... almost the 'Quiet American' syndrome. It seems that implicit in
this sort of statement is that one group of people is more important
than other groups of people.
And Juergen, I'm sure you already know this, but 'freedom of speech' is
a myth, even in the USA. Here is Australia, they claim that we have such
a freedom, except that we have the harshest libel laws of any Western
country. We can say anything we like, unless it offends the powerful.
Of course, this is a political question. Sorry for bringing this up here.
I know moderated discussions from German Usenet. That works completely
different. First, the community discusses (with a formal vote at the end),
whether or not they want a moderation, and what rules there should be
for moderation. Then, two or three moderators are elected for say a year.
Not just one person saying, that he'll delete this, and he'll delete
that ...
Regards,
Juergen
--
/"\ ASCII ribbon campain | |\ _,,,---,,_
\ / against HTML in | /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_
X e-mail and news, | |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'
/ \ and unneeded MIME | '---''(_/--' `-'\_)
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
