--- In DTXpress@yahoogroups.com, "brown8700" <brown8700@a...> wrote: > Restricted? I would say it isn't necessary with three moderators on > board. Offensive posts could be promptly trashed. Stephen, Duly noted. But see Zilla's latest post here. It might get awfully tiring policing all the messages, as opposed to checking ID's at the gate and watching the new posters for a while. Also, indirectly in favor of restricted membership is the poor response we've gotten lately in polls and posts that were really shameless pleas for a show of the silent majority's hands. Our completley unrestricted membership was unable get us a number of participants remotely close to the 730 people who belong at least nominally. I like the size of the membership. I feel strongly about protecting it, and swelling it if at all possible, but the small proportion of phantoms who might pass up this group because they can't read its messages without waiting for a membership confirmation might not be the right people to determine our general policy. How serious (well, serious for drummers) could they be? So far, restricted membership seems to be carrying the day, but let's keep monitoring the opinions. Ed
Message
Re: Moderator has been asigned
2003-08-05 by liberatusvirus
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.