RE: Continued RFC process

[Dan Sugalski]

At 09:04 PM 10/10/00 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> >
> > > Closed-for-posting mailing lists that are publically readable is the
> > > best suggestion we've had to meet these ends so far.
> > >
> > > Anyone have better suggestions?
> >
>
>Instead of group-writable and world-readable, how about group-writable
>and world-moderated?
>
>(Or just plain moderated, with the flavor o' the day being
>autohandled...)
>
>It's more work, which I am not a fan of, but I'm not a fan of everybody
>having a say, nor a select few workers having a say.

I rather like it. Russ did have a point earlier, and I'm tempted to leave 
things open at the moment, or go the dual-subscription route and 
automoderate everything as OK until a problem arises.

                                        Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk