Re: Mail sent to midcom (fwd)

[John Leslie <john at jlc.net>]

   I really don't want to participate in a flame-war about "moderation",
but

Donald E. Eastlake 3rd <dee3 at torque.pothole.com> wrote:
> 
> As long as WG chairs are trusted to determine WG consensus, I don't
> see why they can't determine if a message is obviously irrelevant to
> the tasks for which a WG was created. 

   It is a bad idea to assign to the same person the tasks of limiting
_input_ to a discussion and determining the _output_ of a discussion.

   We should _try_ to move away from any discussion of whether our
leaders are "trustworthy", and instead discuss whether the _structures_
in place are designed correctly to achieve our purposes.

--
John Leslie <john at jlc.net>