|
Another fine message from the rec.arts.movies.erotica reading room...
[Prev][Next][Subject][Thread] Re: RFD: rec.arts.movies.erotica moderated
On 21 Jan 1996 00:33:09 -0500, [email protected] (Director) wrote: >On 20 Jan 1996 08:13:27 -0500, CA38 wrote: > >> What, if any, delays should we expect in the posting of the moderated >> messages? > >As I told Lamont, we're planning on having 5 moderators, which will apn >the atlantic, so there shouldn't bee too much lag. At the most, I forsee >24 hours. > >> If part of a posting is found unsuitable, will the offending parts be >> deleted, or will the entire message be sent back to the author? > >If part of a posting is bad, then part of it is good... if part is good, >it should probably be posted... however, there is also percentages to >think about. > >If a post is 100 lines of "fuck you" and one line of "I thought deRenzy's >babyFace 1 was much better than its sequel" I think the post would >probably be rejected... > >Of course, my other moderators may have their own opinions on this >topic... Stay tuned... > >Jeff >-- And here's mine:) I'd rather the author have a chance to edit the post before it's put up. If it's half relevant, and the other half a binary or advertisement,etc., they would be notified which part is unacceptable. Usually on alt.sex.movies, it's an all-or-nothing proposition: it's either relevant or a blatant ad/binary/junk. The "gray areas" are rare there, and I don't see a problem with dealing with many on r.a.m.e. I'd rather reject reject an entire post than to only approve a partial amount; that could lead to taking things out of the original context of the author, no matter how some may switch trains of thoughts rapidly.. Brad References:
|