dns based loadbalancing/failover

Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2001 21:14:47 -0700
From: Adam McKenna <adam-nanog@flounder.net>

> > Most mailing lists I am on seem to get by fine without overt
> > moderation - including this one.


You've conveniently failed to address the issue where the list
moderator of namedroppers took it upon himself to edit the
content of posts before forwarding them to the list.

You know, as the former editor/moderator of the Info-IBMPC Digest list
for a fair number of years, and not having subscribed to the
namedroppers list, I frequently edited the content of postings (if only
to make them more readable and/or to tone down rantings), rejected
others (sometimes with an explanation of how to make it more suitable
for publication, sometimes without one. Usually with an explanation

Sometimes I ran the changes by the submitter, sometimes not...
Depended on how much 'editing' I had to do.

> > Prefiltering to suit *any* one individuals opinion of what
> > is or isn't on topic seems highly suspect for any list, and
> > unacceptable on a list supposedly to define policy.
> so in order for a policy-defining forum to be considered
> representative, it must be open to all posts on all topics
> from all parties at all times? that does not match not my
> intuition on the matter.

This is a straw man. The messages that were sent clearly fell
within the list's charter, yet they were rejected and/or edited
by the moderator for what appear to be entirely personal reasons.

The moderator (editor, in my case) really has the final call on what
gets posted and what doesn't... Sorry, but them's the rules.

In any case, this is straying a bit afield of the charter for nanog...

Gregory Hicks

I don't think the point is necessarily what a moderator has rights
to do. The point is, on mailing lists of IETF working groups, if a
message fits the charter then there is no reason not to post it,
with minor editing if necessary. It is a conflict of interest if the
moderator removes commentary about himself *if* the commentary is
in keeping with the charter. The question is, of course, how strictly
is the charter interpreted and is their prejudice against the poster
who is having his posts moderated.

Irregardless of the above opinion, this is not a topic for NANOG and
should be moved to nanog-offtopic.