On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 03:42:45AM +1000, Debbie wrote:

Debbie,

> At risk of getting my head shot off, i must say I don't have a problem 
> with contentious political stuff under OT.

It doesn't bug me either. But a couple have voiced dissent.

I think the dissent is valid. Especially Olin's point that he subscribes 
to OT specifically to pick up OT electronics posts and Bob's point that
the digest contains everything.

Russell even acknowledged that the original post was far out of scope
by marking it [WOT].

> I seem to recall the Gulf War intruded
> into OT 'cuz it was important to a lot of our American friends. 

> The Corby case
> has a lot of Aussies _really_ angry. Rightly so too, but that's only my
> opinion. So yep, I agree censorship is something we can do without. 

Good.

> Errm ...   but we may need a referee! Debbie :)

I don't think moderation works here. The two technological solutions raised
so far, another WOT or NT channel, and some programmatic way of specifying
digest content shoul be able to resolve the issues for all concerned 
parties.

BAJ
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist