tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10903320.post113088960213306510..comments2023-08-15T01:24:39.187-03:00Comments on The Other Side of Truth: A Code of Conduct for Ufology, Part IIPaul Kimballhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08804735930733797952noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10903320.post-1130970650293892492005-11-02T18:30:00.000-04:002005-11-02T18:30:00.000-04:00Isaac:Who is the community? Anyone with a computer...Isaac:<BR/><BR/>Who is the community? Anyone with a computer and an axe to grind? Therein lies the problem with the Internet.<BR/><BR/>The only way to deal with it is for a person to judge for themselves whether a list is run efficiently, and without bias. Updates meets the first criteria, but not the latter. Perhaps its not possible for a list to be run fairly - perhaps a moderator will always favour his friends over others he either does not like, or does not know as well. But I don't think so. I think a code of conduct that was enforced where every member was concerned (including off-list attacks a member might level against another) would work, with a moderator willing to be even-handed, and a membership willing to call him on it when he wasn't.<BR/><BR/>Every now and then there will be a decision that someone doesn't like - that's fine. Life is like that - as the Stones famously said, you can't always get what you want. But if you try sometimes you just might get what you need, and right now ufology needs a better list than Updates, or an Updates that deals with everyone in an even-handed manner.<BR/><BR/>Otherwise, ufology will remain a fringe topic, the scientific equivalent to pro wrestling. It exists, but it's not real - it's just a show.<BR/><BR/>PaulPaul Kimballhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08804735930733797952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10903320.post-1130949387135734962005-11-02T12:36:00.000-04:002005-11-02T12:36:00.000-04:00Paul,I'm a regular participant on Joe McGonagle's ...Paul,<BR/><BR/>I'm a regular participant on Joe McGonagle's Ufologyinuk mail list (posting there considerably more often than I post to Updates). I've expressed my own view about Joe's List on Updates:<BR/> “Joe McGonagle's "ufologyinuk" List is the nearest thing to a forum for 'serious ufologists' in the UK that I'm aware of ...”.<BR/>http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/apr/m19-014.shtml<BR/><BR/>However, as Joe would be the first to acknowledge, his List also gets a degree of criticism. For example:<BR/>(a) several individuals consider Joe's List dominated by sceptics. <BR/><BR/>(b) several individuals have left the List in the past due to their posts (or the posts of others) being moderated. <BR/><BR/>(c) several individuals have left the List because of the sometimes heated nature of the exchanges.<BR/><BR/>It seems to me that, regardless of the existence of any Guidelines or Policy in relation to a mailing list, at some point some individuals are going to complain that there is insufficient moderation, excessive moderation or improper moderation.<BR/><BR/>Having read quite a few mailing lists which were completely unmoderated, I prefer to spend my time on moderated lists.<BR/><BR/>If someone (like Joe or EBK) is prepared to spend the time and effort in running a moderated List, then I think that its users should accept that sometimes the moderator will not necessarily act in the manner that each and every user would wish.<BR/><BR/>The only way to get moderation which you agree with is to moderate your own List. If everyone moderated their own List (?or Blog) and did not participate on the Lists run by others, then how do you get "community" wide communication? Or do you just give up on that?<BR/><BR/>Kind Regards,<BR/><BR/>IsaacIsaac Koihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04619755188522396631noreply@blogger.com