Good point, recently we underwent the return of a loose cannon who seemed
to genuinely want to begin making contributions "on topic", but his first
post included thanking the list admin for steering a few "names" in the
proper direction. This naming of names infuriated a few individuals.
His farewell of a few months ago was absolutely profane and his recent
return (albeit content laden) was greeted with a multi-paragraphed bashing.
My attempts to quiet the furor were fruitless until I took a
overcompensating, strongly worded approach. Although I took a lot of heat,
the aggression was diverted from the loose cannon for a moment.
Publicly threatening to ban several (unnamed) members was extreme, but I
have a feeling most wanted to avoid becoming a victim and subsequently
stopped posting trash to the list. Of all the list wars I have seen here
in the last year, this was the shortest lived.
At this point, we are considering publishing a daily moderated digest in
addition to the regular minute by minute distribution. I think the
advantages to having a second format will be that the "hardcore members"
will have the content-only format they desire, and it eliminates the need
to subscribe to both lists. Posting will continue through the original
Does anyone have experience setting up this sort of format? How much more
work (aside from filtering the incoming mail manually) is involved. And
how complex is setting up this type of format?
From: Chip Rosenthal[SMTP:chip @
Sent: Friday, May 23, 1997 2:27 PM
To: Rick Umali
Cc: List-Managers @
Subject: Re: Should I Moderate List to Avert Flaming (Suggestions and
Rick Umali writes:
> Q: Is switching the list from unmoderated to moderated a
> good tactic to "calm the waters"?
My experience is that the mere threat often is enough to knock
everybody back to their senses.
Chip Rosenthal * <chip @
Unicom Systems Development * http://www.unicom.com/
Junk email is theft - there ought to be a law * http://www.cauce.org/