List rules

List rules

From: Larry Bloch <larry.bloch§>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:21:15 +1100

Are there list rules? If so, can you post them to the list?

If not, perhaps as a collaborative project, the list can agree a set of
guiding principles you can use to rapidly bring sanity back when the odd
individual gets cranked up (pun intended).

I would go for some items such as:

 - postings to be relevant to the subject line and the general theme of DNS
 - restrictions on threads that are generally held to be unproductive
jousting between two protagonists
 - one warning by the moderator prior to being banned for a cooling off
period (24 hours)
 - moderator ability to ban a thread 

I know some of this is subjective, but at least it gives a moderator the
ability to apply some common sense when it is evident that none is being

I don't think anyone wants a heavily moderated list, but lists being what
they are, moderation is necessary to maintain relevance. This list is the
only public resource for raising and getting feedback on DNS issues and I
for one would like to see it become much more active. Despite the relatively
hassle free nature of .AU at present, as those involved with auDA well know,
there are a multitude of issues that affect this industry that pass with no
debate for want of a well functioning forum.

At present topics in this category include the upcoming tender for the .au
registry, the release of geographic and names, auDA's plan
to use the proceeds of this release to fund aspects of the
management/operations of the community geographic names ( etc),
the auDA Foundation which has received about $2m of auDA funds to distribute
as grants and many many more topics.

I would very much like to provide transparency to the .AU industry and
community about many of these issues - after all that's part of what I stood
for in becoming an auDA supply side representative. However, without
adequate moderator protection, many otherwise useful and serious
contributors will not post because of the crackpots who lack respect for the
rest of the members of this forum.

There have been calls for moderation before this. At this point, if nothing
can be done to make this list relevant, perhaps we should consider creating
a new list with stronger guidelines?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kim Davies [mailto:kim&#167;] 
> Sent: Tuesday, 22 March 2005 2:51
> To: info&#167;
> Cc: dns&#167;
> Subject: Re: [DNS] Reseller alleges theft of $730 by 
> Registrar [was] [DNS] Bottle Domains - transfer issues URGENT 
> HELP PLease.
> Quoting info&#167; on Tuesday March 22, 2005:
> | 
> | I will as I have always done in recent posts state an example or 
> | actual quote to substantiate: [snip]
> Those who are interested have read your emails, and those of 
> others, and I dont see dragging this on is elevating the 
> discourse. Responding to people who don't want to talk about 
> it will not keep the discussion alive in any meaningful way. 
> If you want to discuss it further, I suggest you email people 
> privately.
> | The facts are that in this thread only yourself and Adam a 19 year 
> | old, have indulged in name calling.
> You do realise by dismissing Adam as a 19 year old, you are 
> effectively name calling? What else does that tid-bit have to 
> do with anyway? No wait.. don't answer that. Or if you do, 
> reply to me only.
> kim
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives => 
> Please do not retransmit articles on this list without 
> permission of the 
> author, further information at the above URL.
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:08 UTC