Alberto Monteiro wrote:
> IMHO, if purely technical threats and c*nsorship
> is what we want, then anyone can be a listowner.
> OTOH, if we wish to c*nsor name-calling, shouting,
> harassment, etc, then the listowner must be a
> semi-lurker [which would _also_ discredit Julia :-)]
Someone mentioned to me off-list that someone who regularly participated
in threads that got heated wouldn't be such a good candidate for
listowner, which would let out Gautam, Jeroen, JDG, Dan M. and a host of
others.
I've tried very hard not to get into heated debates, and keep my temper,
since I became a listowner. I've done this because I felt that the
listowner ought to try to stay above the fray. I know I failed in this
in December 1998, and that's still haunting me.
I also think that if we're going to have some Chief of Etiquette Police,
it shouldn't be a listowner, but that if the CoEP thinks that drastic
action needs to be taken, it be discussed with all the listowners and a
consensus reached. That's what happened the one time someone was barred
from posting in the past.
But if the general will of the list is that I step down as listowner,
I'll be fine with that.
Julia
