I would heartily endorse the consideration by all concerned
(especially Stephanie et al) of the following. It's expressed more
concisely here than I would have been capable of:
>
> Second, there must be a way of handling all this chit-chat in a better way.
> I suggest that there should be two mailings (like Native-L does) when a topic
> gets more than two interactions, it moves on to another "CHAT" network. Other-
> wise, the network is kept for postings, announcements, and current research
> among scholars, or just simple news on what's going on in the non-academic
> world.
>
> Third, there is an acknowledgment on THIS network that flaming is easily
> achieved despite intentions not to. My suggestion is to borrow from the
> Bahai's. Whenever an idea is proposed, then it belongs to the table (the
> network). So if someone wishes to challenge my suggestion, that person does
> not need to mention my name, The suggestion doesn't belong to me anymore.
> This also helps in defusing any ego that might come with the proposals.
>
> Finally a network might consider the idea of moderation (not censurship!).
> Two networks that I subscribe to are moderated and they are very succesful.
> Of course this takes a lot of work on the part of one or two good persons.
>
