From: chitoor@thorin.cis.udel.edu (Srikrishnan R. Chitoor)
Subject: Re: Discussion on forming soc.culture.kerala, should we moderate ?
Followup-To: alt.culture.kerala
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 02:08:54 GMT

Hi all,
   Before plunging into serious discussions, let me introduce myself.
Name : Look at the header (No, `Look at the header' is not my name :)).
Doing MS in CS in University of Delaware.

In article <Pine.3.02.9301121817.A17254-c100000@gwunix1.gwu.edu> tstpcc@gwunix1.gwu.edu (Paul C. Chemmanoor) writes:
>
>1] Our gutless anonymous friend has in his/her/their fury also shown us
>   the solution to the problem. Net stats he claims show that 
>   we have a distribution of 13000. Which is pretty good for an
>   alt group only in its 4th month and devoted to a specific
>   part of the population.
>
>   Lets discuss the formation of soc.culture.kerala.

Right. ACK does not reach a lot of places. We better start SCK fast.

>   Feel free to discuss anything. 
>  
>2] I personallly feel two things must be part of the new charter
>   which we will able to enforce, unlike the one for ack:
>
>   i] No religious propaganda.

I agree, but religious news can be allowed.

>   ii] No anonymous postings.

I do not know why we should ban anonymous postings if they do not
contain offensive materials. Offensive materials can be defined as
those that denigrate someone personally (rather than discuss the
issues).

>   
>   I would like to see a moderating mechanism which consists of a group
>   thereby canceling out any single persons biases. The moderation 
>   I think must be limited to keeping out postings likely to vitiate

Yeah. Moderation is required if ACK has to maintain its decency.
I have liked the kind of discussions in ACK and would like it to be the
same in SCK.
    The same criteria described above can be used for moderating articles.
(Any article containing personal attacks is either removed or the part
containing the attack edited out).

>   the newsgroup.
> 
>   Please discuss this issue on the net.
>   Lets hear opinions. 
>
>3] I do not want any part of this moderating mechanism, though I 
>   am willing to take the vote and start the new group off, when 
>   the time comes [Probably in two or three months].
>   
>   I am tired of fighting ack's wars.
>   
>   The only immediate concern I have about the junk postings is that
>   the daily mail packet has reached almost 64 K, which is a heavy
>   load on the system and makes it less useful to the person recieving it.

I do not agree with this. Irrespective of the quality of articles in ACK,
people might like to post a lot. Then we cannot restrict them saying that
heavy load on the system makes it less useful for the person reading it.

>4] I believe I am right about how religious propaganda destroys a group.

Religious propaganda may not destroy a group. People get so passionate
reading the propaganda and start personal attacks. This is the one
that destroys a newsgroup and should be avoided. 
   I can even give an example right from ACK when Mr/Ms. Anonymous
posted articles on alleged fundamentalism in Kerala. People in ACK
took it cool (did not become passionate) and there was no mud-slinging.
Therefore, what we ought to avoid are the personal attacks.

>   I am sure our friends who insist on posting despite the active
>   majority will prove me right.
>   
>5] Taking a long needed break from preaching.
>   Paul Chemmanoor. Good Luck.

2 u 2.

Krishna.
-Opinions are mine.
Newsgroups: alt.culture.kerala