Will says:
> Joshua says:
> >Once you advocate restraint, or enforce it, it can no longer be called
> >"open dialogue". It becomes "moderated discussion" either if the authors
> >moderate it, or someone else does.

> I have to disagree here.  Restraint is entirely appropriate.  Dialogue
> without restraint would degenerate into a brawl.  I didn't see the
> offending post, but there are plenty of places on and off the net to
> be offensive.

"I don't like what you're saying, but I'll defend to the death your
right to say it."

Admittedly we SHOULD try to keep within the charter*. :)

However, you are making quite an assumption that a world without restraint
is necessarily a world of conflict. After all, Usenet and Internet email
are precisely that... almost entirely reliant on self-restraint. Yet most
people are perfectly fine, and the jerks are made to feel unwelcome. In
our particular case the postings were not made by jerks... and I don't 
think they deserve the tongue-lashing that was meted out.

The offensiveness fell within the charter, though... as Fridays are a
free-for-all.

If there is some plan to change all this, let me remind you that if
we are going to live in Disneyland, please require the alligators to
have rubber teeth. :)

*ObVW: A rusty VW in the back yard with lawn seed is called "Ghia pet".

------------
Joshua R. Poulson, Systems Engineering, ADP Dealer Services, Portland, OR