Re: [ba-poker] RGPM: Moderator Selection - Call for Volunteers

[foldem <peter(deleted the rest)>]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 02:35:13 -0500, Bill wrote:

>There hasn't been any discussion about this for a week about this post
>so I'll respond.  I don't know if ba-poker is the place to talk about
>it...

It's not - the place is on RGP and in news.groups.  I posted here
asking for moderators because I know that this list (and several
others) is where people have gone to hide from the nonsense and spam
on the RGP list.

> but since Peter brought it up, I think asking for moderators is like
>putting the cart before the horse. First we should talk about *whether
>we should have* such a group, that question is still up in the air.
>
>I am sorry I disagree with Peter, Patti, and Steve.   I can see why they
>support a moderated group, but if I want a moderated group I'll go over
>to 2+2 thank you

Please read the current version of the moderation and posting policies
-  Message-ID: <news:retg50pnnhm459puefrc1ducc4evmndn0f(deleted the rest)>

We are not talking about censorship here.

>I have not seen the RFD for votes on RGP yet.  If one comes up I will
>vote NO--I hope everyone who feels this way does the same thing.  If the
>group is created, I will probably not participate (though I may change
>my mind). 

You don't participate on RGP now Bill.  Neither do many other valued
posters - there's too much crap and flaming.

>  I feel there are already many such moderated or invitation
>only forums and I participate in a few of them.  RGP is unique in having
>a completely open forum.

And RGP will still be there just as it is now.  But there will be a
NEW group RGP.moderated for those that would like to have a spam and
advertising free place where they can post without being flamed and
hounded to death.

> Also the poker world is extremely fluid at
>this moment--I wouldn't want to put standards on what is germane to the
>RPGM group.

Not sure what this means.

>
>This is with all due respect to the three people listed below. I respect
>what they have done for RGP, but I respectfully disagree with their
>decision to support RPGM by agreeing to be moderators.  
>
Gee thanks Bill.

Glad to know that you will vote on the issue without reading a
scintilla of the discussion that is available on RGP and news.groups.

I don't wish to continue the discussion in this forum.  I would
suggest to any who are interested that they tune in to RGP and
subscribe for a time to news.groups.  That is the appropriate place
for discussion.


Best,

Peter
RGP BAAP 2002/03
"There are no strangers at BARGE, just friends we haven't met yet"