Re: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes

[Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>]

Greg Broiles wrote:
> One approach to the name question would be to eliminate
> "cypherpunks@toad.com" and force old/new subscribers to choose between
> "cypherpunks-edited" and "cypherpunks-unedited". The advantage I see is
> that it provides more accurate feedback about what people want; the present
> method provides information about the perceived value of unmoderation
> weighed against the bother of dealing with subscribing & unsubscribing. The
> disadvantage is that it's likely to eliminate many subscribers, and that it
> tends to abandon the "cypherpunks@toad.com" history which is, by now, ~5
> years old.

A good thought, Greg.  One problem, though.  My suspicion is that
Gilmore/Sandfort really wanted to have all the current subscribers
to the old unedited list to automatically be part of the new edited
list.  I don't think your possible approach would be acceptable to
anyone I know, forcing people to re-subscribe (and implying that those
who don't do anything would be unsubscribed, which would freak the
list owners out for sure).