Sorry to start this thread, guys.

On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:02 AM, pickle vanagon <greenvanagon@gmail.com>wrote:

> Unfortunately, I think it is clear that this list does require a moderator.
> Recently, some messages have been downright spam.  I think if you were
> going
> to be the moderator, you would need to be prepared to err on the side of
> caution in your own posts for that period.  It would not look good if the
> moderator was responsible for some of the questionable emails on the
> list---even if they are a little bit related to vanagons.
>
> -Wes
>
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 7:41 AM, BenT . <syncro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Robert,
> >
> > Let clarify my point. I do not necessarily want THE job. However, I would
> > like the job done. So far nobody has stepped up to the plate. Picking a
> > moderator from a "show of hands" is not exactly my idea. That was Jim's.
> > Though I think he is looking more for opinions on whether any moderating
> is
> > even necessary. I moderate a few other groups now. So far we do not have
> the
> > sort of issues we have here or even the type of constraint in more
> tightly
> > controlled groups.
> >
> > For the record, you might notice that most of my jesting w/ Mike Miller
> is
> > usually related to some Vanagon themed activity. For example, the recent
> > postings about burning things at the beach is about activities for
> > Burningvan this Saturday. We have found in the past that friendly banter
> on
> > the List just before the event results in improved attendance.
> >
> > Thanks for your opinion. I hope this thread can start us back on the road
> > of sanity or insanity as the case may be. At the rate that things were
> going
> > last week, we were going everywhere w/o clear direction.
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> > BenT
> >
> >
> >
> > ------Original Message------
> > From: Robert Fisher
> > Sender: Vanagon Mailing List
> > To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> > ReplyTo: Robert Fisher
> > Sent: Jan 14, 2009 3:52 AM
> > Subject: Re: Vanagon List Moderator
> >
> > --snip--
> > Anyway, please share our thoughts about this. Pmail if necessary.
> > --snip--
> >
> > Two thoughts came immediately to mind: The first was 'Jonas's First Law
> of
> > electoral politics': What disqualifies a person for the leader's job is
> > that
> > he or she wants it.
> >
> > The second was about those occasional but lengthy barrages of non-vanagon
> > related inside jokes that you and Mike Miller indulge in, especially
> around
> > this time of year. Talk about wearing out the delete key.
> >
> > I have nothing against you personally but I don't think that picking from
> a
> > show of hands is the way to go about this.
> >
> > If we are going to have a moderator (and we should probably have a
> > moderator) I'd be inclined to have a slightly more formalized structure
> in
> > the form of an elected council or board (of say, nine people) who would
> > then
> > appoint a moderator and an 'assistant moderator' (as a standby/fill-in)
> > from
> > amongst themselves; those two individuals would then be disqualified from
> > being the head of council or board chair (*). This council would also set
> > policy (as in the charter) and perform various other administrative
> > functions that you find in most large human organizations.
> >
> > The problem with even benevolent dictatorships, as was demonstrated so
> > clearly with Jim, is that they inevitably generate resentment in both the
> > governor and the governed. I think that recreating that situation is just
> > begging for more of the same problems down the road. Having a small
> > representative body should take a good deal of that pressure off of the
> > individual moderating. On the other hand, if he or she screwed up they
> > would
> > have the ability to can them if necessary, which isn't possible with
> person
> > holding all the keys. (See * above.)
> >
> > Cya,
> > Robert
> >
> >
> > Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
> >
>

--
Michael in San Antonio
91GL AT 'Gringo'