NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16/NN_1992_16.iso/spool/comp/sys/apple2/17791

Internet Message Format | 1992-07-22 | 1.6 KB

Xref: sparky comp.sys.apple2:17791 news.groups:15992
Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!news.funet.fi!hydra!klaava!cust_ts
From: [e-mail] (Tero Sand)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2,news.groups
Subject: Re: Comp.binaries.apple2 moderation: why not?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 23 Jul 92 07:51:41 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 22

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Amrit Chauhan) writes:
>Tell me something...did you see a post that explained how the IBM moderated
>group is _dead_?  Do you not think this a valid reason for _not_ having
>moderation here for cba2?  Sure, I can believe Jawaid will do a good a job
>as he _can_ and I also understand all the rationale...but it still doesn't
>give me an assurance I need for this issue.

No, I didn't see it. If it was there, I apologize. I agree, now you
presented a reason (see, I can accept reasons for 'against').

But is it a reason for me? No. I'm not convinced that moderation is the
cause (btw, how is it implemented? What's the charter?).

Or, let me put it this way: if you want me to consider that this _might_
happen, then I want you to consider the possibility that within 5
years somebody will spread a virus and hundreds of users will lose all
their data.
--
-Tero Sand
  EMail: [e-mail]     Snail mail: Auroran Sairaala os. 6-1
  (if that doesn't work, try                    Nordenskioldinkatu 20
   [e-mail])                  00250 Helsinki 25, Finland