Rich Graves <rcgraves@disposable.com> very correctly mentions:
1) Moderator liability and anonymous posting.
I agree that this is actually a critical problem with a filtering moderation scheme. Such a scheme appears to provide the capability to filter out possible "copyright violations" posts. From what I remember of the Netcom/CoS case (without going back to the sources), that may mean more liability for the reviewers (and the operator of the machine). That's a major point against simple filtering moderation. (Which is considered principally because that's way that's most compatible with current mail readers, really.) ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) responded:
[in another forum] After long thinking, moderator board has come with the following solution:
1) We do not know for sure if a certain post violates some copyrights or not [and more in the same line 2,3,4,5]
Would any of this have mattered in Netcom/CoS? Instead, a system that would forward reviewers' opinions *after the fact* does not have any of this problem. And we have already mentioned, it is also more powerful (real time initial feed, easy multiple feedback feeds, fully compatible with anything else...) although it does not reduce bandwidth requirements. Pierre. pierre@rahul.net