On Moderated and Un-Moderated Status

[Kelley]

First, I'd like to thank Steve for his excellent posts; I don't think 
it could be stated any better, so thank you, Steve!

> Steve said:
> > Also, many 'newbies' worry that what they are posting has already 
> > been discussed. I'm here to assure you that YES it has already 
> > been discussed, but we don't let that stop us from discussing it 
> > again. >>>

Heh; I've told many people this very same thing.
 
Steve:
> > You will be greatly rewarded for your effort, in that you will be 
> > able to give more depth and thought to your original idea, and 
> > may even discover a new angle (which happens all the time) on an 
> > old subject.

Dina:
> So, all the fuss I caught about how the main list is partly 
> deteriorating because of the redundancy of topics is hot air out of 
> folks?

Eh.  Like others have said, there've been those complaints since the 
list's earliest days.  I've complained about it a bit myself in the 
past (relates to why "Dumbledore's gleam" became such a joke, not 
only here, but all 'round the fandom), which I'm now not very proud 
of, I admit.

But on the other hand, if we ruled that no topic could be re-
discussed (sounds completely ludicrous, doesn't it?) well, heck, we 
may as well close the list now.

So, yeah, while it can get tiresome to see a topic rehashed for the 
umpteenth time, there are always going to be new members to the group 
who've not yet had the chance to discuss that topic and are eager to 
do so.  It comes down to reading the threads you like and skipping 
what you don't.
 
Dina:
> I'm curious... You're probably not on moderation-- <snip>  If you 
> post a reply to a thread, it hits the list, and a half hour later 
> another message pertaining to the same thread just hits the list 
> and you want to reply to this message on-list, will you be 
> penalized for the second reply and placed back on moderation? >>>

No, Steve's no longer on moderated status, and no, no one would be 
placed back on moderation for what you describe.  It would have to be 
seriously rampant (post after post after post coming fast on the 
heels of each other all on the same thread *and* if the person did 
this very often, for example), and we'd contact this person first 
asking them to combine more.

Dina:
> I know a person under the moderation queue would be penalized and 
> kept under moderation because they can't predict any messages 
> *after* they've sent their reply.

Mm, not exactly, but I take your point; of course no one is penalized 
for not being able to predict future messages.  My method of handling 
this when I come across this situation in pendings is to combine the 
posts myself, and contact the list member explaining why.  If they 
have two posts on the same thread in pending, but those posts are an 
hour apart, of course I don't expect the person to hold off making 
their posts until the end of the day so they can combine everything, 
or anything of the sort.  But, if it's something I can easily do, I 
will, and I'll explain to them what I've done and why; it's 
absolutely not anything negative against them, though.

Particularly when there're some hot topics of discussion -- the 
threads are moving fast, and people are eager to discuss.  I tend to 
send through far more posts than I reject (though I typically will 
edit, mainly to snip down quoted material, add/fix attributions, or 
fix spelling/typos/punctuation stuff, rearrange top-posted 
messages).  Often, because one topic has diverged in such various 
directions, combining is just not appropriate.
 
And, seeing that both yourself and Steve have posted further on this 
topic since I started writing this reply <g>, I'll add in some of the 
latest comments:

Steve:
> I frequently find that the post rate is so high, that two or three 
> more posts have been made in a thread while I am in the process of 
> typing my response. So, to some extent, even off moderated status 
> you are still at the mercy of time and volume.

Yep, extremely true; this happens to us all.

Dina:
> I think the OTChatter group can offer a more comfortable area, 
> unless the rules are altered to be more strict, while the main 
> HPFGU group will always be a 'big brother is monitoring you - take 
> it or leave it'.

Mm. Well, we've never had a rule that canon discussions *can't* 
happen on OTC; I definitely appreciate the point that OTC 
is 'quieter' and thus more comfortable for folks, so I can feel a 
little more easygoing about it right now while main is so busy. But,  
overall, canon discussions really should happen on main (which, if 
history holds true, should be slowing down a fair bit in the next few 
weeks).

I will say however that there's been some discussion about formatting 
problems here -- people top-posting, not snipping, not proofreading 
for spelling / typos / punctuation / capitalization, etc., and this 
*is* something we'd like to see upheld here as it is on main. (Goes 
for the Movie, list, too.) I see Steve has commented on this, as well:

Steve:
> Believe it or not, big brother is watching here too, and is holding
> you to the same standards of form, but since the rules are 
> different, this isn't pure canon with high volume, this is low 
> volume with nearly any topic goes, fewer posts are rejected.

Yes, and I will repeat that the standards we have for the main list 
are the standards we'd like to be followed here (and on Movie), too, 
but exactly -- this list and the Movie list are slower than main, so 
much more work is required to keep up the standards on the main list.

For this, it feels as though we're letting down the folks on this 
list and the Movie list who would like the formatting quality to be 
better on both. I was actually thinking last night about bringing up 
this very topic on Feedback, so I would be very appreciative if 
anyone there would like to discuss this issue.

Dina:
> I believe it or mods wouldn't have come on this list at all to 
> relocate the feedback.
>
> Apparently, I'm mistaken about this list then.

Well ... of *course* we do.  Though the levels of strictness vary, 
there is a form of moderation / monitoring on all the HPfGU groups.
 
Dina:
> I repeat - I do *not* care about altering the main list.  I don't
> necessarily agree with the list rules but I don't care about 
> altering them.

Understood.
 
Dina:
> I'm arguing there be a HPFGU 'lobby area' where folks can talk on or
> off-topic and anywhere in between.  <snip> The OTChatter could be 
> this list where it really doesn't matter what the heck we're 
> talking about.

Yeah, I understand what you're saying, and I guess that's sort of 
what my thinking is up above.  At the same time, a lot of people here 
would probably prefer OTC *not* be the 'lobby area' for main list 
discussions, that it stay the relaxed off-topic chitchat list that 
it's always been.
 
Dina:
> My question then is:
>
> Where is there a mailing list that I can pull ideas off HPFGU, talk 
> about them without fear of moderation (Ex: if I start about Petunia 
> and then divert to HBO's Six Feet Under in the same message - those 
> that watch SFU might get the joke), bring up the HP movies or 
> websites, or talk about something completely irrelevant... and not 
> deal with tweens and their teenspeak or homophobia?

Well, first I'll say that I'd really like to see your post re Petunia 
and SFU (I'm a fan, though I missed last week's ep, grr, <g>), but as 
for other groups, there are plenty out there all right, and I'd not 
be surprised if you've already been offlisted with invitations. ;->

Here are a bunch of links to other HP groups; I certainly can't speak 
to topicality / moderation / ages of list members, etc., but I'd say 
it's definitely worth checking them out.  Some of these are just 
groups I've heard of, some are from the "Harry Potter Web Sites and 
Yahoo groups" folder in the Links section on the main list:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Harry_PotterBookDiscussionForAdults/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Harry_Potter_for_Grownups/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ISPOL-HarryPotterObsessed/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AdultHPFanatics/
http://www.harrypotter-boards.com 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers/ 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hogwarts_common_room/
http://www.pottertalk.com
http://hp4grownups.proboards23.com 
http://www.thesnitch.net/forums/ 
http://groups.msn.com/theinsaneworldofharrypotter 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theforbiddenforrest/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HogwartsAdultSchool2/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotteranonymous/

And finally, to reiterate what Eloise said, discussions such as this 
are precisely the reason the Feedback list was created in the first 
place.  Of course no one *has* to join that group, but once again I 
will state that Feedback is the appropriate list for discussions of 
policy, so let's please move this discussion there.

--Kelley