1997-04-17 - Re: 2nd RFD: sci.chem.organic.synthesis moderated

Header Data

From: “Igor Chudov @ home” <ichudov@algebra.com>
To: news.groups@news.news.demon.net
Message Hash: f59fac1c468f9e223590903ce29858232d58525a76d817981fc40966754b46a3
Message ID: <199704170104.UAA11294@manifold.algebra.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-04-17 01:08:21 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 18:08:21 -0700 (PDT)

Raw message

From: "Igor Chudov @ home" <ichudov@algebra.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 18:08:21 -0700 (PDT)
To: news.groups@news.news.demon.net
Subject: Re: 2nd RFD: sci.chem.organic.synthesis moderated
Message-ID: <199704170104.UAA11294@manifold.algebra.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Koen Van Aken (cheakv@panther.gsu.edu) wrote in <861165888.2842@isc.org>:
* 
* At the end of each article, a full name and e-mail address is
* mandatory. Listing of position and association is optional but
* strongly encouraged.

... snip ...

* CHARTER: sci.chem.organic.synthesis
 
 
* This proposal is pro moderation to filter out unwanted (see not
* permitted postings) and 'anonymous' (see signature policy) messages.
* Although there are some disadvantages associated with moderated
* groups - some people compare it with censorship and it slows down
* the discussion - , sci.* groups have been plagued before with off-
* topic discussions which eventually turned users away.

I fail to see any reason why you need to filter out "anonymous" email.
I think that restricting anonymous email goes a long way against ability
to discuss important issues in general. I find it overly restrictive and 
unwarranted.

Your explanation as to why you find it necessary to exclude anonymous
postings from your particular newsgroup will be much appreciated.

igor





Thread