If only we could have ways of filtering out idiotic comments, then Vortex-L would take off in terms of popularity.
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > Just a note to some of the newer Vorts who may be wondering how moderation > works in Vortex. Vortex is moderated, but only very lightly. The list > relies heavily upon the self-discipline of members to keep a courteous tone > and to moderate the amount of their own contributions. Ideally the tone of > the list would be that of academics at a Starbucks during the personal time > of a conference -- polite, letting the conversation go where it will, not > necessarily hewing to the rigor of the conference but at the same time > avoiding issues that are contentious. This is just an ideal, and it is not > always observed. Sometimes weeks or months can go by where a user or two > will have their way with the forum, posting a string of flamebait and > personal attacks and trying to wrench discussions in the direction of their > own choosing. This strategy is obviously not an effective one for winning > people to one's point of view. Almost invariably such people get tired of > posting to Vortex, and those that don't will eventually be cleaned up by > Bill Beaty when he gets around to it (it can take a while). In the > meantime such individuals must be suffered. > > The best strategy to keep the signal to noise ratio high and to avoid > getting caught up in arguments during such periods is filter out the emails > of the problematic individuals. In Gmail, this can be done by setting up a > filter. There are different options, and one is to have emails from > certain email addresses automatically marked as "read," so that they do not > grab your attention. If enough people do this, the people imposing on the > list may get the hint and either moderate their participation or go away on > their own. > > Eric > >
