>
>
>
> It could very well be that a moderated newsgroup may be the only way to
> rescue SCIT. However, everytime the subject of a moderator came up, the
> defenders of the free speech seem to raise an alarm. Besides, I am not
> aware of what it takes to moderate a group. Still, it is a suggestion
> worth looking into.
I could be classified as one of the "defenders of free speech." I do,
reflexively, raise an alarm whenever the issue comes up. Besides
plain prejudice, I have a couple of reasons for this:
1. scit is an open-discussion, broad-charter group. Moderation works well
for narrow-charter (usually technical, theological etc.) groups but
not for broad-charters.
2. Past and current experience on usenet with moderation proposals as they
relate to subcontinental soc-type groups leaves me skeptical as to the
possibility of a moderation regime *not* degenerating into a petty
territorial power struggle between self-appointed "pettandaarlu." I
believe that part of the reason for this is a strong sense of vanity
that pervades our Indian culture, but a major part is also the plain
difficulty of objectively moderating a soc- group. Lacking a focussed
and technically achievable goal, the energy rapidly shifts to politics.
3. Specific peril of moderation, even when it is successful: we risk losing
the "pasa" in the discussion. Ramakrishna garu's point about different
levels of self-moderation is well-taken. I would liken scit to a coffee-
house (where a modest amount of beer is also consumed) where a lot of
free-flowing ideas are expressed with varying degrees of vehemence.
While flames are generally considered a bad thing, they can be fun
and provocative as well--where would Telugu culture be without the "flames"
of Tenali Ramakrishna or the "flames" from Krisnaarjuna Yuddham,
raamanjanEya yuddham etc.? I'll come out and confess: I actually enjoy
some of the scit flames; it is the mediocre, convoluted, repetitive
deaf-adder style flames that irritate me. But I haven't yet
hit upon a way of isolating good flames from bad ones other than to
develop an informal list of interesting posters and only read their
articles and discussions.
>
> The problems I see now with SCIT are three-fold:
>
> 1) A high ratio of non-Telugu vs Telugu posts: Skipping 10 posts to
> find one Telugu related post soon causes one to skip logging on to the group.
Moderation will certainly cure this problem. My current solution is
a killfile (amazing how many posts "punjab/a:j" gets rid of) along with
a threaded newsreader which shows the author's name with the article
header. I only read the articles of familiar players, and follow
their threads to become acquainted with other interesting posters
who might be conversing with these people. I prefer to do this job
myself rather than have a moderator do it for me.
For certain categories of disruptive posts (the "Kulbir" variety, eg)
it is in theory possible to practice collective discipline and not
respond. soc.culture.jewish readers have implemented this successfully
in the past.
>
> 2) The chances are that even that one Telugu related post may not be of
> significant interest (we all have different tastes, dont' we?)
I think this is one of the areas where an unfair burden is
placed on a moderator(s).
>
> 3) If and when we find a Telugu related post on a subject of interest,
> the chances are quite high that the tone of the post may want us to leave
> it in a hurry.
Agreed. We all have faced this difficulty. We have something meaningful
to say, but it gets drowned in a torrent of inanities and profanities.
Again, a potential moderator will have a problem with this. What is
he or she to do, e.g., with a post that has no "boothulu", but is
insultingly patronizing to everyone from Nannaya downwards, full
of dithering circumlocutions, pompous in the extreme and has little
or no point to it? There is something wrong with an across-the-board
moderation policy that would permit such a post, but eliminate a
well-argued post with a well-placed "boothu" that adds rhetorical
value to the post. Will some of Tenali Ramakrishna's or Vemana's
writings survive such a moderation policy?
>
>
> All three problems are probably inter-related. The increasingly
> hostile tone of the posts may be responsible for the flight of the frequent
> posters to the safe confines of the listservs. That flight, in turn,
> leaves only the cross-posts and the flames.
I think Ramakrishna garu's "svotkarsha" comment is a propos.
Also, given the relatively large population on scit, it is probably
impossible for Telusa to siphon off all the talent from scit. Some
of us, will no doubt, continue to participate on scit.
>
> IMHO, given the nature of the net, an unmoderated SCIT will not
> be rid of crossposts and flames. However, whenever there was a high volume
> of good posts even on a controversial issue, the level of flames
> generally goes down. I remember a particularly hostile thread on NTR's
> policy of 2 rs Kg Rice scheme suddenly climbing to a higher level once
> the likes of Ari seetaramayya and banDi Sreekant entered the thread.
>
> My solution at this time is as follows:
>
> 1) Increase the number of Telugu related posts on SCIT. It can be
> achieved through several means:
>
> a) Pump-in the TELUSA posts into SCIT. Even the
> Ghantasala listserv's posts could be pumped-in too.
I strongly suggest that we leave this to the discretion
of the individual Telusa members. A simple crossposting mechanism
could be set up to make it possible for interested people to
crosspost. As I stated in my other post, I would have a problem
with any automatic "pumping."
>
> b) Seed Telugu related topics regularly on the net.
> Sometimes, these seeds can generate enough follow-ups to swamp the rest
> of the non-Telugu posts. Remember the many threads spawned by
> Aravinda's request for a receipe for a sweet?
This is a good idea. A sort of reverse subversion of scit.
>
> c) Make it a point to respond to any interesting Telugu
> related thread, just so that there is enough Telugu related posts. If
> every one of us posts once a week, it is 60 more Telugu related posts a
> week on SCIT than we currently have.
Good idea, but is it practical? I have a lot of things I want to
say on Telusa itself, but they go unsaid since I lack the time
to formulate them. Others are probably in the same predicament.
>
> 2) Respond to the hostile posts in one of the following ways:
>
> a) respond politely - if necessary with exaggerated
> politeness - on SCIT if the discussion is worthwhile continuing.
Good idea, requires discipline. I try sometimes, and have a pile
of clawed and chewed cushions to prove it. :-)
>
> b) send a private note to the hostile poster mildly rebuking
> him/her about the importance of good manners. I suggest that this approach
> be used with utmost care. Don't use it unless you have some connection with
> that poster or that you are convinced that the poster would listen to reason.
>
> c) ignore the hostile posts completely.
Probably the best solution. Again, sometimes hard to implement.
>
>
> If enough of us are interested and committed, we can get SCIT
> back to the way it was, even if it is unmoderated.
>
> What do you say?
I haven't been around usenet soc-groups in a while due to work
pressure. I rarely stay away long, though, so I for one will
make an effort to single-handedly raise the mean quality of
scit postings (Is that enough svotkarsha for you, Ramakrishna garu?:-))
Bapa Rao