Free speech and GA (Re: [ga] Time to put...)

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <Harald@Alvestrand.no>]

At 13:31 31.12.99 -0600, Weisberg wrote:
>Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>
> > Michael,
> >
> > I agree that we should have a moderated list.
> > The problem is the definition of a fair set of rules.
>
>What activities do we need to protect against and what rules are capable of
>addressing those specific problems?
The two issues we seem to be facing at present are:

- Claims of a single individual posting under multiple names, which has led to
   a request for a verifiable identification of people posting here
- Irrelevant messages, including messages that cause large amounts of debate
   with no forward movement in any process

Added to that, we have the bashing-at-open-doors posting of a certain 
person who, despite being able to post in his own name, chooses to use 
others' names; the relevance of the point he's making is that we should 
have a visible rule about who's allowed to post or not, instead of asking 
our listadmin to both make the rules and enforce them.

The list technologies we have available are:

- Prefiltered mailing lists, which mechanically disallow certain messages
   and let others through
- Moderated mailing lists, which require human approval of all messages
- Semimoderated lists, which let some messages through, but require human
   approval for others.

In addition, we have the possibility of using cryptographic verification of 
messages to the list; this requires that the posters have this technology 
available.

Happy new year to everyone!

                            Harald A
                (insomniac in the year 2000)
--
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
Harald.Alvestrand@edb.maxware.no