on 9/9/02 9:39 AM, Joseph Barisonzi at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Jim, > > And how is it substantively distinct from the list we are currently > participating in? I mean other then the obvious, that Jim is the > moderator accountable to no one rather than David who is accountable to > an elected board of directors?
Joe and members - Jim can illuminate the differences, but I welcome another discussion list! Many list members have principled disagreements with my decisions - what constitutes inflamed rhetoric, for example, or what is not Minneapolis-specific. The problem managing the Minneapolis-Issues list is one of success: it is the big online discussion game in town, so when people get tossed off or disagree with the charter, they feel as though they are cast out into the wilderness. (I am sensitive to this, by the way, which is one reason people aren't expelled as quickly as some would like.) Personally, I believe a no-holds-barred, virtually ruleless list will quickly prove too negative and unfocused to have much influence. I'll admit a major reason behind creating rules and enforcing them is to keep many segments of the community at our virtual table: that's a big reason we discourage personal attacks - because it drives many members away. But the beauty of Jim's list is that we won't have to rely on beliefs or guesses - people can respond to the marketplace of ideas. Mpls-Issues was never intended to be the only game in town - it was created because there were no games at the time. I applaud Jim for trying to create another forum. I think it's long overdue. David Brauer King Field List manager, Minneapolis-Issues _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
