Ray Arachelian wrote:
Filters aren't intelligent enough. How do you propose to filter out the anonymous dialy warnings about Tim May?
I keep hearing about how moderation is essential to get rid of the noise so that 'code writers' can have serious discussions. Am I to understand that I am expected to have some kind of esoteric faith in 'code writers' cryptographic output, when they can't even write a filter that meets their own requirements?
Even our friend Vulis has sane posts when he takes his medication (though I suspect he does so rarely.) Filtering out everything he posts doesn't make sense, as reading the sane stuff will have some value. I don't want to miss what he says when it is worth my time to read it.
Exactly. And I don't know how 'any' moderator is going to satisfy your personal desires, and mine, and those of several thousand others. I don't know 'Sandy' from spit, and it doesn't really matter to me whether he is God or the SpamMan. He may be the most well-intentioned person in the universe, but if he can psychically divine what 'everybody' wants, I'll kiss your butt.
The proposed scheme should not affect anyone in any way. Those who want the filtered list will get it, those who want the spams and flames and ads and turds will get them, those who want it all will also get them.
Split lists won't lead to 'harmony', it will lead to 'fractation'. Putting up a sign that says, "Flamers must sit in the back of the bus." seems like a good idea. The fact is, however, that it leads to a society with a structured class system, and history has already told us where it goes from there. Blacks have always had the option of 'going back to Africa, where they came from'. (It's a 'free' country, isn't it?) Toto