At 12:01 11/09/2018, Nadine Andrews wrote:
>I agree with thus suggestion.
>[which suggestion was "I'd delete the messages that have been
>complained about from the archive, and then follow Option 3.]
Given the options on offer, I also agree, but would/does this
actually represent any change from the present/past situation?
Every list/group of which I've ever been involved in the management
of has dealt with messages which were unacceptable (for any reason)
by deleting them (in the case of an e-mail-based list, that can
obviously only mean 'delete from archive') and by taking appropriate
action with respect to the author (a 'warning', or worse). I had
always assumed that the same has always been the case with Radstats -
is that not the case?
Pragmatically, I think the question is probably moot. Moving to a
moderated listed is unrealistic and would probably result in the
death of the list - so options 2+3 (together) are really all there is.
Kind Regards,
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dr John Whittington, Voice: +44 (0) 1296 730225
Mediscience Services Fax: +44 (0) 1296 738893
Twyford Manor, Twyford, E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Buckingham MK18 4EL, UK
----------------------------------------------------------------
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|