> As long as I was invited: You were / are. I'm an admin fwiw. So is Bob. Just to add perspective. We both protect the integrity of the PIC and EE tags for thir intended purposes 'to the death". TECH is "my baby" and Bob doesn't have too much to say about it. OT started off being mainly my area [OT][TECH][EE] ... with Bob more responsible fro the other end [PIC][EE][Te...] but he has increasingly seen fit to stray into OT of late. His choice. But not generally a really great idea IMHO. He , of course, disagrees. OT has been much discussed in the part. Aim is ANYTHING not otherwise covered that is of interest to members but NO religion (a wide term), hate or politics. Alas Vitaliy is a libertarian (he'll tell you) and Bob hates libertarians (he's told us) and/or thinks they are stupid. Vitaliy is more cautious with his language towards Bob but the traffic both ways is overly heated often. = A rational interchange between B&V for more than a few exchanges seems impossible. I'm in NZ so immune to US politics. But, as Bob said, less able to see what may wind others up. (Not unable to see - I know what does - it just makes sense from down here). Alas though the one by most the wound up by V is B. Others may object to what V says, and any member is free to complain to admins on or off list, but largely its the B&V show that predominates. I would like to see what works for most people that upsets few people as being OK with a few limits. Pure politics and pure religion are clear enoug= h limits. But Bob sees economics + V as politics and we are off. V does not help things by pushing boundaries and thinly veiling his politics. What fun we have. What I want is something a bit clearer than what is clear cut to Bob. I don't hold that admins are God. Admins are slaves to the masses IMHO. That doesn't mean we should let individuals tyrannise others, but it does mean that if most are happy we don't need to utterly define boundaries. But will if needs must. Bob feels the need when Vitaliy is involved. Vitaliy generally doesn't help himself :-). Bob and I both want the best for the list. We have some disagreement on hiow to achieve this :-) > I joined this list relatively recently. I joined to discuss PICs, EE, > etc. If you look in PIC and EE that should be ALL you get.. If in TECH also an engineering education. OT should be for the mature - but with no sex religion politics. Endless regress ... > And maybe a little OT friendly banter. What I found instead is is > rudeness, immaturity, dishonesty, and (very) thinly veiled political > discussion. Rudeness, immaturity, dishonesty, and (very) thinly veiled political discussion must ONLY be in OT - and very very largely not even there :-). Anywhere else OT stuff should die very rapidly. > I am a moderator on a political forum, and I know how hard it is. You > can't possibly write a set of rules that cover everything. The rules > are a guideline, and the moderators are the judges. It would be nice if > the posters could act like adults, but that's not going to happen, trust > me. The moderators have to be the adults. Aye. > You can't jump on somebody because they say "I don't like the USPS > because it's tax subsidized" or "I don't like Fedex because it's > non-union" (assuming it's within the context of 'shipping'), but when > the discussion degenerates, you need to say "enough", and posters need > to know it's time to knock it off. And, there's the rub. Thanks for sharing. Cmon guys - more input please - on or off list. Bob says he doesn't know what I seek to achieve. Try this - A rule set that is understood and that allows most people to discuss whatever they want in OT so long as vanishingly few are upset by it= * AND no hate politics religion sex. (The last 3 because they are the universal flame drivers and there are many places to go to be immolated)."Hate" is wide and wooly and most know what that means. Most. Russell --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .