Call for moderation/filtering on bionet newsgroups

thomas merchant tm37atacme.gatech.edu at dont.spam.me
Sun Aug 17 10:16:42 EST 1997


>> Here's hoping for a little moderation. Anyone agree?
>
>When Dave Kristofferson was still the person "in charge", he told me
>that he was against a moderation of bionet.general in favour of "free
>speech".
Things have changed quite a bit since then. It would be interesting to
see if he still felt the same way with the current noise to signal
ratio.

Advertising is a privilege, not a right, and should not be equated
with free speech. Also, advertising in all forms of other media, is
filtered to suit the audience. You don't see sex ads in _Nature_, you
shouldn't have to put up with them here. Spam is also a form of theft,
both of time and disk resources; thieves glory in their anonymity as
do spammers posting with bogus names and addresses.

Moderation to filter out advertisements that are off topic is not
censorship: it is good management. I am sure that most mainstream
periodicals would quickly go out of business if they started to print
the volume and type of crap ads that we have had to put up with,
especially if they were forced to print them without payment.




More information about the Bioforum mailing list