Re: National Website in Japan (pressing for an action)

[Iain <iain ximian com>]

> If the moderation route is gonna be taken the moderation (IMO) should
> follow a well known (read published easily available) set of
> rules/guidelines. This will make the any potential moderator's life that
> much easier. Also they should be defined _before_ moderation is
> implemented. Something like the following 'common sense' guidelines:
> 
> 1. On topic, ie if the article is about the lastest wizbang gnome widget
> don't go ranting about some kernel bug.
> 2. No personal attacks, got a problem with developer/person/company <x>
> take it up directly with developer/person/company <x> not here. This isn't
> your personal soapbox in your crusade against developer/person/company
> <x>.
> 3. By all means _discuss_ the project. Discussion don't involve
> project/thing <x> sucks and no one should use it. If it sucks _why_ does
> it suck? Debate is good, pointless flamming is bad.

See, this is why moderation would fail. It's very subjective. For
example #2 (if implemented on dot.kde.org) would stop the comments about
theKompany.com forking Magellan, which are perfectly valid (IMPFUO) for
the discussion.(*)

Moderation doesn't work. If people want to discuss stuff, we've got
mailing lists. *shrug*

iain

Free, Free, Free Satpal Ram.

(*) Admittedly, my suggestion to remove all comments would also mean
that these comments would be stopped too.