Trent,

Moderating a list is a thankless task - definitely.

I'm not so sure that "no news is good news" in this list's case. I think its
probably fairer to say no news is an indication that the real issues are not
being raised in this forum, and that is a pity. Why are the issues not being
discussed here? Because the list lacks credibility as a place where useful
debate happens, and that’s an historical fact.

This list has been over used for outbursts (as we have seen yesterday),
vitriolic personal attacks, loony conspiracy theorists, hatchet jobs and the
like. You only have to go back and see Chris Disspain's written comments on
his attitude to posting to this list to see a reflection of that reality.
His frustration with the manner and tone of postings is shared by many of
the professionals in this industry who as a result lurk but steer clear of
posting.

If all of us subscribed want to get something more that the odd bit of news
out of the list, then as a community we need to have some sort of acceptable
use standards - formal or otherwise. And I take your point that the recent
episode did resolve in a 'natural order' way. Its just a little inefficient
sometimes.

Larry



> -----Original Message-----
> From: trent§sos.net.au [mailto:trent§sos.net.au] 
> Sent: Tuesday, 22 March 2005 11:46
> To: dns§dotau.org
> Subject: Re: [DNS] List rules
> 
> 
> Larry,
> In theory, this would be great, but Kim, at least I assume it 
> was Kim, 
> has outlined in the first line of the policy that this list 
> is unmoderated.
> 
> Like your own post, my point is subjective. The 'other thread' is 
> history and it was self moderated to a degree. In so doing, 
> if just one 
> person took some form of education away from it, then 
> although annoying, 
> it served its purpose. That might mean fewer of these outbursts and I 
> know that's hoping for allot, but I'm a hopeful kind of guy ;)
> 
> If Kim wishes to moderate, that's his decision as list 
> manager, but it 
> is a time issue, so I for one would understand if he chooses 
> not to. In the mean time, the list, as Sean pointed out, 
> generally moves along 
> at a dead crawl. This is indicative of the "no news is good news" 
> cliché, and we can, as Vic pointed out, use the good ol' D key when 
> someone won't leave well enough alone.
> 
> Having said all that, and provided you have the time Larry, perhaps a 
> related list is something you feel would be in order? 'Any' list 
> generates information we can potentially learn from, and I would 
> definitely have a look at the focus of any new list that 
> might assist me 
> in advising clients and colleagues.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Larry Bloch wrote:
> 
> >Kim,
> >
> >Are there list rules? If so, can you post them to the list?
> >
> >If not, perhaps as a collaborative project, the list can 
> agree a set of 
> >guiding principles you can use to rapidly bring sanity back when the 
> >odd individual gets cranked up (pun intended).
> >
> >I would go for some items such as:
> >
> > - postings to be relevant to the subject line and the 
> general theme of 
> >DNS issues
> > - restrictions on threads that are generally held to be 
> unproductive 
> >jousting between two protagonists
> > - one warning by the moderator prior to being banned for a 
> cooling off 
> >period (24 hours)
> > - moderator ability to ban a thread
> >
> >I know some of this is subjective, but at least it gives a moderator 
> >the ability to apply some common sense when it is evident 
> that none is 
> >being exercised.
> >
> >I don't think anyone wants a heavily moderated list, but lists being 
> >what they are, moderation is necessary to maintain 
> relevance. This list 
> >is the only public resource for raising and getting feedback on DNS 
> >issues and I for one would like to see it become much more active. 
> >Despite the relatively hassle free nature of .AU at present, 
> as those 
> >involved with auDA well know, there are a multitude of issues that 
> >affect this industry that pass with no debate for want of a well 
> >functioning forum.
> >
> >At present topics in this category include the upcoming 
> tender for the 
> >.au registry, the release of geographic .com.au and .net.au names, 
> >auDA's plan to use the proceeds of this release to fund 
> aspects of the 
> >management/operations of the community geographic names 
> (sydney.nsw.au 
> >etc), the auDA Foundation which has received about $2m of 
> auDA funds to 
> >distribute as grants and many many more topics.
> >
> >I would very much like to provide transparency to the .AU 
> industry and 
> >community about many of these issues - after all that's part 
> of what I 
> >stood for in becoming an auDA supply side representative. However, 
> >without adequate moderator protection, many otherwise useful and 
> >serious contributors will not post because of the crackpots who lack 
> >respect for the rest of the members of this forum.
> >
> >There have been calls for moderation before this. At this point, if 
> >nothing can be done to make this list relevant, perhaps we should 
> >consider creating a new list with stronger guidelines?
> >
> >Larry
> >  
> >
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/ 
> Please do not retransmit articles on this list without 
> permission of the 
> author, further information at the above URL.
> 
>