RE: [off-topic, but not by ukcrypto standards] ukcrypto-moderated pre-moderators needed

["Owen Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ben Laurie
> Sent: 03 November 2004 14:49
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [off-topic, but not by ukcrypto standards]
> ukcrypto-moderated pre-moderators needed
>
>
> John R T Brazier wrote:
> >>>>Ben Laurie wrote
> >>>>OK, since my previous attempt to create a lower volume
> >>>>ukcrypto-like-thing failed, I have concluded that the only way to
> >>>>handle the problem is to produce a moderated version of ukcrypto. I
> >>>>know for sure there's demand for this, but I also know that the
> >>>>volume is too high for traditional moderation methods (at least too
> >>>>high for _me_ to use traditional moderation).
> >>>
> >>>Peter Fairbrother wrote:
> >>>I have a question. What do you think is on topic?
> >>>
> >>>The original charter, as I understand it, was to discuss UK
> >>>legislation relating to cryptography - which is fine, but very little
> >>>is happening in that area right now, and there would be virtually no
> >>>posts.
> >>
> >>Ben Laurie wrote:
> >>I would include privacy and anonymity as well as cryptography. I'm
> >>open to persuasion for other topics.
> >>
> >>Killing time isn't one of them.
> >
> >
> > Super idea, which should allow people who wish to follow the
> list without
> > grubbing through all the noise.
> >
> > However, it would be useful to know what would be included and
> what would be
> > excluded. The pre-moderators would need this, for a start, otherwise the
> > thing will get inconsistent.
>
> I do intend to attempt to make that clear. In practice I do not think it
> is possible to 100% define a moderation policy.
>
> > Another question occurs. Is the point of this solely to reduce
> time? If so,
> > why not just take a list that randomly samples a certain
> percentage of UK
> > Crypto posts? This would allow people to get the gist, and I
> suspect overall
> > information loss would be small.
>
> I sincerely doubt that. But feel free. I'm not going to do it.
>
> > Peter Fairbrother, in his analysis, also gave me a pointer: he
> has already
> > found a solution to the volume problem. I have a similar one -
> I refer to it
> > as my 'drivel filter'. I suspect many others on this list have
> also reached
> > similar pragmatic strategies (and a comparison of them might be both
> > interesting and illuminating). However, would these people
> migrate to the
> > new list if they've already got a solution? The way the
> movement to the ID
> > list was minimal would imply not.
>
> It is a strategy I have also considered.
>
> > It seems to me that UK Crypto has simply taken on a more roving
> commission
> > as compared to its original remit. When the Government is legislating
> > crypto, then the list is usually very on-topic. When the
> government isn't,
> > then the list feels free to widen its interest. Whilst
> difficult to define,
> > I think it does tend to stay in the areas of privacy, security,
> government
> > legislation, misuse of powers, anonymity, freedoms, the odd
> excursion into
> > technology, and so forth. It's a bit hard to define, but I
> detect a fairly
> > consistent set of topics within this list. Is this what we
> want? It appears
> > that the list is currently very popular.
>
> I certainly think that many of the topics discussed are appropriate for
> a moderated list, definitely including the above.

An application of set-theory?

Those who gather here have widely different education, experience and
interests. Yet there is (almost always) quite sufficient common overlap in
the discussions to give the list a critical mass. Those for whom that is not
true tend to leave in search of a list/group that more closely matches their
requirement.

There is one other point I think. The quality of argument in this list is,
more often than not, of a high quality and well informed. It's higher than,
in my experience, is commonly found elsewhere, especially where politics, in
one guise or another, is central to so many threads. It may be that others
who stay with this meandering list also appreciate this.

Owen