Zack & Jon -- i'm not sure it's a good idea to copy David Reed and
Larry Lessig on these huge e-mail messages.  It might be impolite to
ask their opinion Without giving them the context of the discussion.

(And for God's sake i finally had to fix the spelling in the subject.
I couldn't take it any more...)

Anyway, i just wanted to address one thing for now --

On Sat, 2 Aug 2003, Zack Rosen wrote:
> So either the media-network intelligence goes in the nodes of the
> network, or it goes straight to the center of the Dean Media Team
> mother-ship.

A few times now you've talked about "having to get permission from DMT"
or being "controlled by DMT", and now the "DMT mother-ship".  It's clear
that you don't like the idea of someone else telling us what to do.
But it's unfair to describe DMT so adversarially, as though they were
some sort of independent controlling entity.

There is no "us" and "them".  We are all on the same team.

We're in this together.  Would you feel different if we were talking
about as the search hub instead?  Why does it matter?

Slashdot has a reasonably open moderation system, where they hand out
moderator access to lots of people.  The end result of the moderation
is a pretty good consensus on which comments are informative and which
ones are pointless flames.  And i don't have a sense that the discussion
there is being stifled or censored by single-minded moderation.  (The
discussions may be biased because of the user population, but that's a
different thing).

Would you be so unhappy with a system that worked as well as Slashdot?
It would probably be better, since (a) we wouldn't be relying on a
couple of dictators to select all the articles, and (b) our user
population would probably be better-behaved.

-- ?!ng

Reply via email to