From: Pieter Stouten DUPONTMERCK COM> Date: 26 may 1998 Subject: Non-shogi-related postings revisited once more [3] Dear shogi fans, On 98/05/26 at 0:02 -0600, Paul Connors wrote: >Who gets to decide what is "shogi-related" and what is not? > I have done that the past 8 years. As I mentioned, I am willing to let someone else do it, but apart from one respondent, all responses indicated they wanted me to continue. >Currently SHOGI-L is *not* a moderated list. There is no moderator. > In a sense it is, but it is moderated after the fact in the true sense of the word. That you have not noticed it, should tell you something. >I would >prefer to keep it that way, so that no-one can decide for me what is >"shogi-related" and what is not. I prefer to have *no-one* deciding >that *I* should not see what offends *their* taste. > I tried to explain in my previous two postings to SHOGI-L, that my or anyone else's taste has nothing to do with it. I agreed with Sam on the Ishi Press (California) issue; I have no problems with his web pages; I am not offended by the explicit photographs sprinkled throughout his web site and I admit that his writing style is very inducive to wanting to read more of his prose. I am not even insulted by the rage and anger he focused on me. I think it is misdirected, but it is his opinion and needs to be respected as such. After all, I am Dutch and, therefore, proverbially tolerant . On several occasions, I have indicated that Sam adds colour to SHOGI-L and that I'd rather see him stay than leave. Having said that, I don't want SHOGI-L to become a generic newsgroup where everything and anything goes. That's why there are rules and that's why they might at some point even be enforced. So, I don't decide for you what is shogi-related, but I do decide what is shogi-related as far as SHOGI-L is concerned. I appreciate that Sam, you and maybe others don't see it that way, and in that case the best solution is to start a news group or your own mailing list. A news group, once established, needs no maintenance. When a shogi news group exists, one may find that SHOGI-L gets less and less traffic and ultimately it might disappear having lived out its natural life span. On the other hand, the existence of a news group may not affect SHOGI-L much, which will then continue to exist with its two rules. >I am puzzled as to why Sam Sloan's posts cannot be regarded as >"shogi-related". They seem somewhat related to me -- not 100%, >but not 0% either. > Correct. His postings often contain shogi-related material, but large parts have nothing to with shogi directly, and lower the signal-to-noise ratio to the point that several people have complained about it both privately and on SHOGI-L. >I find issues of proposed censorship (or moderation, or >whatever) very disturbing. > I think there is a very clear difference between censorship and applying list rules. As I mentioned, I would be quite happy for someone else to apply the rules and make judgement calls, but the rules are there to stay. Assessment of what is shogi-related is subjective, and at this moment I decide what is shogi-related. If that is not acceptable to people, then they might consider leaving SHOGI-L. I don't want to chase people away (in fact, as Sam indicated, I actively try to retain people), but I own SHOGI-L and I will make sure that it remains devoted to shogi in accord with the picture I had in mind when I started it 8 years ago. Consider it a club with certain house rules, if you will. You may frequent the club if you adhere to the rules; otherwise you may opt not to come. >Can't people take a more robust view of life, and delete Sam Sloan's posts >*themselves* if they so choose? > They probably can, but that is not really the issue. If people object to the low signal-to-noise ratio in Sam's posts then that is their opinion that should be respected. >Pre-censoring him by removing him from the list would be a >significantly violent act. > SHOGI-L has two rules. If one doesn't adhere to them, ultimately that may be grounds for removal. If the list owner points to a (possibly only perceived) violation of the rules, then the perpetrator and the list owner can discuss this if the former does not agree it is a violation. If they cannot come to an agreement, they can even (as an absolute last resort) decide *together* to present the case to the entire SHOGI-L community or the list owner can unilaterally make a ruling. A discussion between the list owner and the perpetrator is not about shogi but about what is acceptable on SHOGI-L and, consequently, does not belong on SHOGI-L. As an example, Sam's posting about Ishi Press (California) may or may not have violated the rules, but his subsequent reaction on SHOGI-L to a private mail I had sent him asking not to post diatribes definitely does. If he or anybody else continues to violate club (i.e., SHOGI-L) rules, then I will remove them. As said, I don't want SHOGI-L to degrade to a generic news group. Thank you for your understanding, Pieter Stouten dupontmerck com>