But that's both my and Francis' point, Slip, that we handle it on-list, and not through censorship. He and I are just as annoyed at the wildly off topic interjection, but our preference as a group is to handle it as a group, and not through administrative content censorship. We agree with your reaction, but not with the proposed course of action.
Now then, champion, care to take us back on topic? ;-) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
--- Begin Message ---So be it, but there seems to be a dichotomy on member opinion regarding thread irrelevancy intrusion. At the least I can say I have a legitimate excuse because I was awarded the only............. MEDAL Thread Purity Champion First Class by Chris who in fact posted early to the puppy post "relevance" Jul 23, 11:06 am, which is obviously a less than appreciative response. I respectfully bow out, thank you. On Jul 23, 5:58 pm, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > On 23 Jul., 23:15, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > . > ... and also agree with Vam that> we should eliminate the puppy dung and > ornography and solidify the > > continuity of posts. These inappropriate and irrelevant intrusions > > only serve as an impediment to the already difficult path to analysis > > and perspective of the complex thread topic, they are an obstacle to > > productive philosophy. > > As an aside I think that irrelevant posts should simply be removed by > > the moderation squad before they even get the opportunity to waste our > > mental energy upon reading them. Why do they even appear? > > Sorry, Slip, I can't agree with this. > > Burn spammers at the stake by all means, and emasculate trolls with a > blunt rusty knife, but we should be careful about calling for active > moderation of posts with regard to quality of content or relevance. > This smacks for me of the kind of intellectual elitism which leads > eventually to a small number of self-satisfied illuminati lost in > wonderment at their own cerebral powers or arguing over the number of > quangles capable of dancing on the tip of a quantum pin. Apart from > anything else, the cut and thrust of discussion here is quite capable > of dealing with them and they are not infrequently the occasion of > insight on the part of another contributor, or at least some comic > relief. > > This is control degenerating into control-freakism. > > Streuth, 'tis indeed a strange world which has me riding in on a white > horse to defend puppy ...! > > Francis --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
--- End Message ---
