Re: Not reading flames, and so on... Or, the history of on-line censorship...

Kelly, re:

<<  I usually just scroll by such things and only pay enough
 attention to see when the message ends so I can read whatever comes
 next, but a lot of people are less patient/more easily annoyed.
 
 Just wanted to speak up for those of us who can't just hit one key to
 skip a flame or personal conversation or a long boring message about
 dryer lint or whatever. :) >>

The problem with censorship, is that it's censorship (hey, that's profound!)
There's no beginning, and there's no end. For example, there are people on
the list that wouldn't want to read the post that you just sent. ("AH! NO WHO
CONTENT!") In order to have "no flames", one has to first "define" what
"exactly" a "flame" is. Then, there has to be "rules of enforcement". ie,
someone breaks the rules. Now what happens? Then, exactly how far does it go?
Do we say... expand our "rules"?

I'd say there are about 5% of the people on the list, that would spend their
time e-mailing the "list censor" over every post that they found
"objectionable". Furthermore, it wouldn't stop there, as they found
"contentment" in their mission, they'd find more things to "censor" and the
rules would grow--mostly as a defense from the "complaints" of the 5%. By the
time the process evolves, people wouldn't post anymore. The list would break
down to people's "thoughts, opinions, etc", because the real people who have
knowledge wouldn't bother to waste their time in watching the line they are
walking...

Prodigy was a classic example of how that system of censorship failed. I
started there in '89. It was very different (some of you may remember... :) )
All your BBS posts were first "screened for content", then posted to the bbs.
Many times, the 18 year old censor, had no understanding of the subject
material and kicked the post back, causing frustration for the sender, who
wasted their time posting. The same post now how to be "rewritten" in a way
that the writer thought this "censor" would comprehend". All kinds of people
complained to Prodigy for years... Other people just purposefully <Riker>
with the censors, posting material to the BBS that was over the heads of the
censors, yet had content that was supposed to be "inappropriate". So, what
happened? The same 5% who want to "control" what THEY want to read, called
Prodigy directly and then posts were just "pulled" from the bbs. It was a
funny cycle. People's goals became to <Riker> with Prodigy, just to watch
their lame attempts at censorship...

After a while, Prodigy eased their policies. They were getting TOO many
complaints from the MAJORITY of the members. So, the BBS were "liberalized",
yet still, posts were pre-screened. You'd always know when a "board censor"
was on vacation, 'cause out of the blue, all your posts would be rejected.
Then, a week later, back to normal. Just for your own edification, this whole
process is VERY time consuming and to them, expensive. 

What they discovered after MANY years is that the same few people were doing
the complaining and weren't really representing any kind of majority. Smart
people are capable of deciding for themselves what they want to read...

So, when their whole censorship policy failed, they created a new system of
"dirty word" traps and "write a board editor" (they edit nothing, they were
simply censors) for the people who HAD to complain. (that was cheaper than
their 800# getting overloaded). Now -a-days, they are lucky they have any
members with so many failed policies...

The moral of the story is this...censorship in this forum doesn't work. It's
easier to control what you want to read and to control yourself, than an
attempt to try and control what others do. So, you do the digest? It's just
as easy to scroll down with your mouse as it is to hit "next". Anyone that
has a tough time with that and thinks it's too complicated, needs major
therapy...

The other problem here is having the wrong attitude. The same people
complaining have a "give me, give me" attitude. Because they subscribe, they
seem to feel they are "owed" something. Therefore, it should be the way that
THEY want it to be. Shaping the list is relatively easy. As soon as you post,
you change the list. This isn't a magazine that people are "paying" for.
People posting here are giving their free time and generousity. Paul is
spending HIS money to make this list work. It's a lot of nerve to complain to
him that he should also spend his valuable time acting as a censor too, just
because some of the list content doesn't suit YOU. 

- -wf