On Dec 12, 2016 2:20 AM, "John Newman" <jnn@synfin.org> wrote:
>
> On December 11, 2016 11:47:20 PM EST, Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> wrote:
> >
> >I filter out what I don't want. Others do the same. I don't decide for others, and I want no one to decide for me.
Agreed. I love the absence of moderation, even being a moderator in other discussion and mailing lists.
We are a pretty heterogeneous group, with all kind of persons here. So, the best option, more coherent with a cypherpunk list and its anarchist ideals, would be to permiss that the own members regulate the list, with no centralized moderation, using -- or not! -- their good sense, self-moderation and filters.
This list will auto-regulate itself in an organic and natural way, with the members' answers and comments, actions and reactions.
> I think that's the final word on cypherpunks moderation.
> It's a terrible idea actually - who do we give powers of moderation to?
It would be pretty hard, almost impossible to be completely impartial here... An example: - I would deny this kind of responsability here because I would feel a 'censor' in this list, not a moderator. I certainly would kick-ban Zzz and eat a burrito to celebrate! :P
"Burro" in Portuguese is "donkey" and, even being a substantive, it can be used as adjective to say that 'someone is stupid, limited'. Example: "Zz is very 'burro'. The diminutive would be "burrinho", but "burrito" would also be accepted as "little donkey" here and celebrate Zzz's expulsion eating burritos with much salsita, guacamole, lemon and lots of chiles ('peppers', not the 'meat chilli', please) would be great and pretty funny, yay!!! :D
Or pizza, because Italian food is always perfect, one of the possible proofs of God's existence! #truelove (*-*) <3
> Much simpler to do as Mirimir has suggested and do your own filtering; it's trivial to setup, as you must know =)
Good night, sweet dreams and much love, Cypherpunks. I'll try to get some sleep, listening to the rain and feeling its wonderful smell... <3
Ceci