> I became convinced that you will never 'get it' until you find
> yourself on the receiving end (=3D maybe, never).

I 'get it' well enough.
I've been on the receiving end.
I didn't like the feeling at all.
It was done irrationally,
wasn't because I had broken any rules,
was due to somebody thinking I meant things that I wasn't even aware
were implied by my comments (and were of no interest to me)(US
domestic politics) - and which were so mild had they been intended
that they fell well inside any reasonable boundaries.

Interestingly, part of my post WAS potentially extremely inflammatory
had there been any strongly pro Chinese communist government list
members paying attention, but the admin never noticed the allusion and
nobody else commented. So I, like enough others*, had done enough to
justify significant treatment, but nobody noticed :-).) =A0(* Many of us
have our occasional excursions. The large majority go unremarked.
Which is as it should be).

As a consequence I acted far more like Olin did in the same
circumstances than I would have expected. An interesting experience.
And the moderation lasted for a significant period for reasons that
were unclear to me.

So, yes, I can entirely put myself in the few other's shoes who have
been in that position.

> As long as a set of rules
> suits you, you will find ways to rationalize them

I'm a bit perplexed as to how "do no harm" has been transformed into
seeming to be rampant fascist repression, but it seems to go with the
territory, alas.

> and even joke about
> "eliminating the 0.1%".

Just in case you didn't notice, I didn't do that (fwiw) I did the
opposite. Somebody asked about the 0.1% and I provided positive
examples of real life situations where you'd try and retain such. And
a thinly veiled metaphorical reference to a 2000 year old example
indicating that every member is equally valuable no matter how large
the flock AND that the outliers are singled out for treatment as being
specially valuable. (In the original example it was 1:99 but the
message was clear that the ratio wasn't the point, but the value of
each individual)

> It was worth a try. At least now I can see how things are more clearly.

Hopefully the above facts will assist the perspective. ie mainly YES
I've been on the receiving end of non rule-based moderation and yes I
didn't like it and no, I didn't joke about getting rid of the 0.1% -
in fact just the opposite.

No medals required - just the hope that people may be able to spot a
bit of sincerity when they find it ;-).

> Sorry for wasting everyone's time.

None of it's wasted if the family all end up happy. It's a total waste
if we spend this much time trying to honestly accommodate severely
disparate views but still find that people are grossly unhappy.

> Vitaliy

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Russell

-- =

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