[Sigia-l] List Moderation

[Samantha Bailey]

While I don't support the idea of "muzzling" any individual, I personally
have been in favor of increased list moderation--for all posts--on this list
for some time.

I think it's a very tricky balance--we've all seen that too much moderation
can virtually kill a list (e.g., CHI-WEB), but I think it's also fair to say
that SIG-IA has suffered from regular ad hominem attacks and needlessly
harsh replies that *have* stifled dialogue--as evidenced by the fact that
the regular contributors to this list are from a smaller pool than 2-3 years
ago, and the fact that people not infrequently say they are hesitant to post
to the list. Furthermore, I'm not convinced that we have only lost the
insights of self-promoters who swoop down when it's convenient--I think
we've also lost the insights of thought leaders who simply don't want to
enter into the fray when there are other forums where they can share ideas.
Fierce debate is one way to hone ideas, but it is not the only way. Perhaps
we can self-regulate, but I take Christina's earlier post about broken
windows to heart.

I think it's important to note that the moderator of the list has applied a
closer lens to individual contributors in the past when there have been
complaints and it *has* resulted in the tenor of the list being far more
civil, after the fact. I think it would be better if *all* posts received
scrutiny, not just the posts of any individual.  To have that happen,
though, we have to decide as a community that we want increased moderation
and we have to come up with a way to provide those resources. My sense from
the messages tonight is that this isn't something the community as a whole
is interested in, and I can live with that (I've stayed on the list through
thick and thin because I continue to find value here, even when I don't like
everything that transpires) but I want to state my opinion on the subject.

Samantha Bailey
samantha at baileysorts.com | http://baileysorts.com