From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Sat Jul 19 2003 - 01:41:52 MDT
Lee Corbin wrote,
> Well, I propose no changes. In fact, I don't even see
> the need for any. Moreover, I cannot even imagine any
> that wouldn't make things worse. But since you are so
> interested in making changes, what do *you* propose?
I propose that the following changes would be much better than what we have
now:
1. All rules be enforced at all times and for all people.
2. Rules that are not enforced be dropped.
3. The list rules be rewritten so that they match the current/actual
process.
4. The list rules be rewritten to clearly spell out what does and does not
constitute a personal attack, ad hominem, flame, misrepresentation, etc.
5. The list rules be rewritten so that punishments for infractions are
clearly defined in advance instead of being decided after an incident.
6. The moderator investigate all complaints and make an official
determination.
7. All moderator actions (complaints, determinations, interventions, and
punishments) be made public.
8. The moderator position be kept filled and be filled by someone who has
time to read the list and respond to issues.
9. Multiple moderators be established to avoid overwork and possible bias.
10. A system of lesser warnings should be established to intervene earlier
without the need for heavy punishments, rather than waiting for the problem
to grow large enough to warrant temporary banishment.
11. That all topic bans (such as debating the basic or guns) be dropped, in
favor of conduct-only rules that allow any topic to be discussed as long as
it is done without getting personal or heated.
-- Harvey Newstrom, CISM, CISSP, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC Certified InfoSec Manager, Certified IS Security Pro, NSA-certified InfoSec Assessor, IBM-certified Security Consultant, SANS-cert GSEC <HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jul 19 2003 - 01:51:20 MDT