[9715] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Some Thoughts on The National Science Board
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rose Marie Holt)
Mon Jan 17 20:29:09 1994
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 1994 17:21:50 -0800 (PST)
From: Rose Marie Holt <rmholt@u.washington.edu>
To: Gordon Cook <cook@path.net>
Cc: hwb@upeksa.sdsc.edu, com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <9401161032.aa06670@pandora.sf.ca.us>
I have gotten a lot of tremendously useful info from lurking (mainly) on
this list, although I really have nothing to contribute, usually, and I
appreciate the opportunity to listen in. The S/N is much higher for me
than for you more qualified
com-privvers, but for me, some S is better than none at all. If H-W
wants to form a moderated list to protect himself from conclusions that
ignorant folk like me might jump to and the ramifications of that
jumping, well, I'd be off to whatever list folks like Mr Cook could
contribute to and folks like me can lurk on. Or even (horrors!) the
relevant newsgroups (talk about your high S/N).
I am a little offended to think that H-W fears I may be damaged or do
damage on the basis of incomplete info obtained from reading posts on
this list. But I'd defend to the point of disconnection his right to post
the expression of his feelings on this list without fear of moderation,
editing or censorship.
RM Holt
> ________
> Now as to your moderated list Hans Werner....... any suggestions for a
> moderator? Lesee maybe it could revolve on a monthly schedule: Al Weis in
> january, Bill Schrader in February, Steve Wolff in March, Rick Adams in
> April....... Yeah. Great idea.
>
> Although there have been lots of complaints about signal to noise ratio in the
> 40 months that I have participated here, this has been a pretty good forum for
> discussing concerns about the direction of the Net. I think that the
> thousands of folk who follow the discussions here might take some offense at
> the suggestion that some moderator is needed to PROTECT them from
> MISINFORMATION.
>
