You hit the nail on the head Julia. Safe 2010 to all.
Helen ----- Original Message ----- From: "Julia Teale" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 1:02 PM Subject: Re: [obsnw] Re: Moderation at the Obs ID newsgroup = censorship?? > Dear H Schultz > > the internet has proved to be a quick, cheap and environmentally friendly > way to distribute information, gather opinion and form groups. The reason > the group on the net is a minority is because people like you seem to want > a > more labour intensive and expensive method applied to our communications. > I > seldom contribute to the discussions on the forum unless I feel I can make > a > valid contribution to the particular discussion taking place. However, I > feel informed through browsing through the discussions and I do feel free > to > contribute to them, should I need to. I have never felt discouraged by > others using the forum.What inclination do you have, if it is not to > participate in the forum? Do you want representatives to visit your home? > Would you like a personal letter delivered to the door? Would you have > time > to read these letters and fill in the relevant questionaires and post them > at the post office or drop them at the library if you do not have the time > to do it on the internet? I seems you have also have not had time to > attend > the public meetings advertised. If you are not happy with this forum, it > is > beholden upon you to provide alternative suggestions, rather than merely > griping. > > While I agree that all Observatory residents deserve to be appraised of > how > their money is spent by the Cid, I also feel it is equally beholden upon > them to provide positive input to those who have worked so hard to achieve > this status. All of those who are involved are ready and willing to > engage > as it is they who really care about this community and its success. Please > H > Schultz, lend us a hand. > > Warm regards and Happy New Year. > > Julia Teale > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "H Schultz" <[email protected]> > To: "The Observatory Neighbourhood watch" <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 12:51 PM > Subject: [obsnw] Re: Moderation at the Obs ID newsgroup = censorship?? > > > My argument is that the onus is not on us to join a minority chat > group but that the Obs Improvement District needs to account to us for > its actions, its plans and its use of our money. The newsletter is > promotional rather than accounting to us. The answer is not to > increase the number of subscribers to this site but to ensure that the > entity using public money seeks to engage with everybody in the area, > not only those who have the time and inclination to participate in > this forum. This may be one means at their disposal but Clearly > doesn't reach more than a few score people. > > On Dec 18, 3:11 am, Jonathan Endersby <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi H >> >> Thanks for your email. >> >> I'm sure I speak for all the directors when I say that we welcome >> public participation and accountability. I'm not quite sure what >> exactly is "confirming your suspicion". I explained in my reply to >> Jason why the moderation is in place and clearly explained that the >> moderation is not censorship in any shape or form. If you have >> something to say about Obsid, positive or negative, your post will be >> let through. >> >> You are right in saying that the current discussions involve a small >> number of people (110 members in the Obsid chat group), which is why >> we're actively trying to get more people to sign up and join in the >> discussion. I note that you're not subscribed. The Obsid.org.za >> website and the latest issue of Obs Life explain how to subscribe. >> (The short version is go tohttp://groups.google.com/group/obsid-chat >> and subscribe) >> >> I look forward to your input on Obsid-chat. >> >> Regards >> Jonathan Endersby. >> >> 2009/12/18 H Schultz <[email protected]>: >> >> >> >> >> >> > This confirms my concern about the Obs Improvement District - It needs >> > to involve greater numbers of people in discussion. At present the >> > web based discussions involve very few people. This is acceptable in >> > a voluntary group but not in an entity which uses our money. >> >> > Communication needs to be informative to promote accountability to >> > those of us who are subject to the charges, whether we are part of the >> > organisation or not. >> >> > On Dec 17, 2:54 pm, Jonathan Endersby <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi All >> >> >> (I'm posting this here as a response to the public message, but will >> >> post it to the Obsid group too) >> >> >> As the person who set up the group and manages the security settings, >> >> I can safely tell you that the reason for setting the group to >> >> "moderate all" is twofold. >> >> >> As Trevor says, the first priority is to make sure that posts are >> >> on-topic. It is of utmost importance that we don't irritate our >> >> subscribers with off topic posts as this will completely undermine the >> >> value of the group as people unsubscribe. >> >> >> Secondly, although one would think that a less draconian approach, >> >> like setting it to only moderate new members, would work, the >> >> unfortunate reality is that this approach failed a few weeks ago with >> >> a rather, err, "colourful" email getting through from a member who had >> >> just joined that morning. >> >> >> I can assure you that the moderators will not censor anything >> >> critical, or bar anyone from posting as long as their post is about >> >> the Obsid. >> >> >> Ultimately this approach has been taken to improve the quality of the >> >> communications for all users. >> >> >> Regards >> >> Jonathan Endersby. >> >> >> 2009/12/17 Trevor Hughes <[email protected]>: >> >> >> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Jason <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> I've just joined the above group & have seen that any posts have >> >> >> first >> >> >> to be approved by the moderators before being posted. I find this >> >> >> disquieting, & am wondering what the criteria are for a post's >> >> >> being >> >> >> approved on rejected? >> >> >> > Pretty much topic basically. If you post to this group looking for a >> >> > lost dog your post will not be approved >> >> >> >> Considering we are all paying for the ID, it seems logical we have >> >> >> ownership of it, & so should be able to discuss freely in an open >> >> >> forum. This whole initiative is supposed to be democratic, right? >> >> >> Why >> >> >> then can we not post freely according to our own conscience, as >> >> >> rate- >> >> >> paying residents? >> >> >> > You may and you may criticize and discuss to your hearts content as >> >> > long as it is relevant to the cid. So if you post an email asking a >> >> > question that does not relate to the CID your post most likely will >> >> > be >> >> > denied. We do not have any hard and fast rules, I am not sure . >> >> >> > There are 3 or 4 moderators and who ever gets to the message waiting >> >> > in moderation first deals with it. I guess if it were some very >> >> > sensitive decision to be made colloboration between moderators could >> >> > happen >> >> >> > This also stops spam from arriving in the group. >> >> >> > I hope this helps >> >> >> > I see there is another message from you in the moderation queue >> >> > asking >> >> > the same question. I will leave it there as I don't think this >> >> > thread >> >> > is covering it. Perhaps one of the other mods will think >> >> > differently - >> >> > note I have not deleted it just left it in the queue! >> >> >> > I just checked the settings and even all the moderators are set for >> >> > moderation! Including myself. >> >> >> > And for the other mods - perhaps moderation should only be set for >> >> > new >> >> > members or members can be moderated if they post off topic too often >> >> >> > Trev >> >> >> > -- >> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >> > Groups "The Observatory Neighbourhood watch" 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 >> >> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/obsnw?hl=en >> >> >> -- >> >> Jonathan Endersby >> >> +27 82 4143129www.arbitraryuser.com-Hide quoted text - >> >> >> - Show quoted text - >> >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> > Groups "The Observatory Neighbourhood watch" 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 >> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/obsnw?hl=en >> >> -- >> Jonathan Endersby >> +27 82 4143129www.arbitraryuser.com- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Observatory Neighbourhood watch" 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/obsnw?hl=en > > __________ NOD32 4736 (20100101) Information __________ > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > http://www.eset.com > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Observatory Neighbourhood watch" 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/obsnw?hl=en -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Observatory Neighbourhood watch" 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/obsnw?hl=en
