As I've not been that active lately but do read
the posts I think that a new rule and option should be bought in.
When a new member joins he/she ought to be placed
on a probationary period of the moderators choosing and after the person
successfully passes the said period then should
they be given the full rights. Till they pass all
their posts should be checked by a moderator
before being published, then I think we can avoid
all the past 'misunderstandings' and other un
savoury matters which have raised their ugly heads.
At 19:13 30/06/2008, you wrote:
>I don't want to beat a dead horse, but re-reading what I wrote below,
>I'm concerned that my poor choice of words might give a false
>impression, so please allow me to set the record straight.
>I cannot fault the monitoring it worked very well for me in a
>recent episode. But I can your handling of the matter in the
>aftermath and my complimentary comment in the post below might appear
>to belie that.
>Disciplinary action was called for and I expected it against the
>character assassinator, but it wasn't forthcoming not then, not
>when others (plural) were slimed and not even when he aimed this
>epitaph at the whole Group. Instead, the ex-member walked away
>voluntarily and to add insult to injury, walked away with what I
>consider a fond farewell from you, Stefan. I have a great deal of
>respect for you and for what you have accomplished with this Group -
>but in this case you made a serious mistake in my view and sugar
>coating didn't make it more palatable. Amen.
>Having just read Eve's post, I support her position that a non-
>conforming member to specified values should immediately suffer the
>consequences and not be allowed to continue as a group member of good
>standing or any other standing for that matter.
>As far as the poll is concerned, there's no question but that
>continuous monitoring cannot be expected Moderators do have a
>life. Pre-screening those who have transgressed in the past is the
>appropriate action if applied ONLY to those who make disparaging or
>prejudicial remarks with MALICE against members whatever their
>religious beliefs or ethnicity. However I hope it doesn't include
>those who simply disagree with our Moderators! Unwarranted and
>unjust censorship is repugnant, but there is much to be said for
>messages being moderated to conform with values set.
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.131 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1526 - Release Date: 30/06/2008 08:43