- No 'you'
- No stabs
- Attribute quotes
- Copy only what's relevant
- Grammar, punctuation, spelling
- Self-contained messages
- No off-list flaming
- Your name at top
- Shortish paragraphs
- Inappropriate messages?
- Because he is a callous, heartless monster?
- Because he hates you and wants you to feel pain?
- Because he has discovered you are paranoid and wants to persecute you (knowing that no-one will believe your story - how diabolical!)?
- Because he thinks he's better than everyone else and simply a pompous ass?
- Because he wants to silence you in case your message blows his whole flimsy scam into tiny pieces. What a craven wimp!
- Because he lacks the insight and intelligence to appreciate true intellect when he encounters it (and one day he'll be sorry!)?
- Because he's a weird, spun-out hippy who hasn't had a hair cut for nine years?
- Because he's an Aussie, so what do you expect?
- It is way, way off the topic or purpose of the list or is just outright irrelevant
- It is a return to a thread which was ended
- It's good old fashion spam
- It's not quite spam but it is still an attempt to post a free advertisement
- Despite the Moderator's most gallant efforts it still doesn't make sense to him
- It comes across as too hostile and even if edited can't be salvaged into a useful message
- Not wishing to cause offence, the Moderator doesn't want to specify exactly why the message was rejected but might do so if asked really nicely and if he's sure the person asking won't go totally birko if told.
- The post has either deliberately or inadvertantly advocated or endorsed an action that is or might be illegal.
- Notices, Advertisements, Bulletins
- The Moderators & List Owners take responsibility for what gets through, so must check everything. That's very hard to do and time consuming when it comes to notices
- A notice of an event or publication can end up becoming a discussion thread - especially if there is ideology involved. This can be disruptive to the explorative tone of some of the lists
- In the case of ideological events and publications, a notice can be taken as an endorsement, and an endorsement can be seen as participation on the list represents sanctioning an opposing ideology
- The emphasis shifts from the thinking of the individual participants to what are their allegiances and alliances
... and that's just a sample of the issues that can arise!
- Articles - Links or Copies
- Signatures
- Endorsements and Links
- All PRODOS projects are okay, including:
PRODOS.COM radio, CelebrateCapitalism.ORG, AmericanIdeals.ORG, PhysicsForum.ORG, etc.
- The Ayn Rand Institute - www.AynRand.org
- Betsy Speicher's CyberNet
http://www.stauffercom.com/cybernet
- EscapingAmerica.com, Moosecove.com/propertyrights.html, Landrights.org, and various news services such as NewsMax, The New Australian, etc.
- No ARI bashing
- Unclear, Don't understand
- "SALOC" Words ... Such As Libertarian, Objectivist, Christian, etc.
- Refering to all supporters of laissez-faire as "libertarians"
For instance, a statement like this: "As libertarians we should oppose this destruction of property rights!" ... might get edited to this: "As [supporters of capitalism] we should oppose this destruction of property rights!"
Note, the [square brackets] indicate the Moderator's intervention.
- Assuming other members on a list are familiar with Objectivism. This is an understandable error, since all PRODOS lists have a high proportion of Objectivists and, of course, PRODOS is an Objectivist.
Nevertheless, a statement like this: "Non-locality is in fact a stolen concept. And this quoted excerpt from Kant defies the Crow Epistemology." ... might have some definitions inserted into it by the Moderator. Or it might be sent back to the poster to fix.
- Blanket condemnations of Christians or Christianity would generally not be acceptable. On the other hand certain forms of praising Jesus or God would probably be edited.
- Other examples may be added later.
- No Homework
- Example of Nice Formatting
- Be Civil to the Moderators.
- FLO factor
- I think thus ...
- Underweight
Please address your messages to the group - rather than any individual. It's like addressing the Speaker (as in Parliament) or the Chair (as in meetings). Never use 'second person' i.e. 'you' statements. All 'second person' statements will get changed to 'third person' by the Moderator.
Wrong:
"You claim that cows accelerated to near light speed acquire uncertainty. Where's your evidence?"
Right:
"Danny MacGregor claims that cows accelerated to near light speed acquire uncertainty. But he has not provided evidence to support his claim."
Wrong:
"You've made a great point Danny! I suppose you must really know a lot about cows. Do you have a farm or have you ever travelled into outer space?"
Right:
"Danny has made a great point. He must know a lot about cows. I would like to ask him if he has a farm or has ever travelled into outer space."
Please try not to express anger or frustration about another list member's message(s). Please do not write anything that suggests another member is: dumb, immoral, vindictive, ignorant.
It's too distracting for the reader and will always be taken as a personal attack by the person you are referring to. That person will then feel compelled to return the favour and one-up you. He'll carry the (perceived) insult around with him forever and nurse it like his most precious possession.
But what if something a list member writes really is infuriating? What if he has demonstrated that he is absolutely the most enormous fool? What if his comments are verging on delusional and psychotic? Isn't it reasonable to express one's anger? What if he really, truly deserves it? Anyway, what if that anger is expressed . . . politely? Or perhaps (heh heh) even subtly?
Well, in that case go ahead! But the message or the inflamatory section will be removed by the Moderator.
I should point out that sometimes a message which is not intended to be in any way insulting can be taken as insulting. It's best to err on the side of caution and politeness. I tend to write as if my comments and innuendoes are so awesome that the slightest insult would be devastating to the reader. That's probably going a bit too far. However, having insulted many, many people over the years I'm probably extra careful these days. At least to their face :-)
Wrong:
"Professor Funkygrog refuses to try Irish stew. He refuses to acknowledge its life-enhancing qualities. I'm sorry if I sound irrate, but all he has to do is add a little grated cheese on top to see that his objections are without any foundation whatsoever. Is this asking too much?"
Wrong:
"I'm afraid Professor Funkygrog really seems to have missed the point on this one. I can't say I'm surprised. Aren't we supposed to be discussing Irish stew? It doesn't matter what kind of grated cheese is used. I thought I'd made that more than clear already."
Right Version 1:
Say nothing. Have a good life.
Right Version 2:
Tell a friend. Get it off your chest. If you are lucky enough to have a friend like me who loves gossip, all the better.
Right Version 3:
Write to the Moderator. Especially if it looks like the Moderator is letting through silly, illogical or unconsidered posts - which I can reliably say does happen from time to time.
Right Version 4:
"Professor Funkygrog writes:
:: Cheeses vary enormously. It is impossible
:: to generalise about them. What works for
:: spaghetti simply won't work for something
:: like Irish stew
As I pointed out in a previous post I have personally tried the grated cheese idea and have found that it does in fact enhance flavour."
Right Version 4:
"I am unable to add anything further at this point to what I have already said. Although it is true that spaghetti flavour is improved with the addition of grated cheese, it is also true that Irish stew can be likewise improved. I'll leave it at that for the time being."
Right Version 5:
"Professor Funkygrog is a stupid, pea-brained, dunderhead who should put himself out of his own and everyone else's misery. If he had another brain cell in his fat skull it'd be howling like a lonely dingo on heat. Speaking personally - and I'm not trying to be rude here - I mean this sincerely and helpfully, and with the greatest respect - I find Funkygrog's posts to this list to be about as constructive as The Bubonic Plague."
Oops, did that go through? Goodness no! The Moderator intercepted it and the world is safe again ;-)
You don't need to pass an English test or get too "precious" about it. It's simply about making your posts easier to read. And it shows the reader that you care about communicating with them with clarity. So, your posts are more likely to be read and responded to.
Bad
i am very pleesed with what i see. the influx of ETs to our planrt a-e is very encouraging it just means that aliens DIF care & when i visit their planet i'll have somewhere to stay for free!!!!!
Atrocious
I AM VERY PLEESED WITH WHAT I SEE. THE INFLUX OF ETS TO OUR PLANRT A-E IS VERY ENCOURAGING IT JUST MEANS THAT ALIENS DIF CARE & WHEN I VISIT THEIR PLANET I'LL HAVE SOMEWHERE TO STAY FOR FREE!!!!!
Good
I am very pleased with what I see. The influx of extraterrestial beings on our planet, Alpha Epsilon, is very encouraging. It just means that aliens do in fact care. And when I visit their planet, I'll have somewhere to stay. For free!
Wrong:
From: Michael Jagger
Man, that's just so true!
Right:
From: Michael Jagger
Richard Starkey writes:
Second hand ballet shoes do not render as clear a sound on the snare drum
Man, that's just so true!
It's preferable to include your name at the top of your message. The Moderator will usually delete any name and signature at the bottom.
The most common reasons for rejecting a message - deeming it to be 'inappropriate' are:
Statistics indicate that most people are still able to get along and lead happy, semi-normal lives after one of their messages has been rejected. Others bear life-long grudges and end up voting for green-left political parties.
Either way, the high standard of all PRODOS lists is maintained, new subscribers continue to join and the all-powerful Moderators sleeps well at night dreaming super-hero dreams.
Exceptions to this rule include: PRODOS run or PRODOS endorsed campaign notices (sometimes), special assistance to valued colleagues, emergencies.
Some of the problems with letting through such notices include:
Alternatively, a regular contributor who wants a notice posted may get sympathetic treatment.
List members are welcome to ask if they can post a notice. But the most likely reply will be a "Sorry, no."
Messages that consist of bulletins, reproductions of articles, or merely draw attention to an online article will usually be declined or just deleted without notification.
Please also note: PRODOS Lists do not usually accept cross-posts.
The reason is that most PRODOS lists are discussion lists or study lists and we want to know what YOU think - not what someone else - the author of an article - thinks.
Also, we don't want to clutter or flood the list with links to articles, and we don't want the Moderators having to spend their time going off to look up and read the article referred to, to see if it is in fact on or off topic.
What if you are the author of an article and want to notify the list of your article? Your notification may still be declined by the Moderator. It will just depend. Furthermore if someone has joined the list merely to use it as a bulletin board to advertise his projects, he can be fairly sure to have his messages declined and may even be removed from the list.
Example:
- - - - - - -
From: Igor Fizzy
Wow! Check out this cool interview about Coca Cola!
http://prodos.com/archive022cocacolais.html
- - - - - - - -
This would probably be declined.
Reproducing complete articles from other publications would probably also be declined.
If you want to draw attention to an article - your own or someone else's - include a relevant excerpt, include a comment, and then include a link.
Example:
- - - - - - - -
From: Bob Battlefield
The anti capitalists are howling in the full moon. As Prodos has often said, they oscillate between being thugs and clowns. Recently, I came across this pile of vicious rubbish and threats on one of the leftie sites:
http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=69880&group=webcast
They are calling for an "online civil dis-obedience campaign" against the Walk. "Disobedience"? As if ideas are coercion. As if disagreement can be treated as oppression. In this way they justify their own use of violence.
They have all these euphemisms for violence, negativity and destruction. Ideas and thinking are not enough. They must disrupt and destroy.
I suppose they're going to have to learn the hard way - as dummies often do.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
The above message is fine. It includes a link, an excerpt, a comment. And a fine sentiment too! ;-)
Email signatures are usually removed by the Moderator.
Links to organisations, websites, other lists, may be removed by the Moderator. Some links to some organisations, projects and websites are acceptable. This is at the discretion of the list-owner, PRODOS.
Links that are currently okay include:
The inclusion or removal or addition of links or names of organisations is at the discretion of the Moderator and ultimately at the discretion of the List Owner, PRODOS.
Unless otherwise stated, all included links are "SPUNE Links" - For Study Purposes & Not as Endorsement.
Respectful disagreements with Objectivism or ARI - Ayn Rand Institute - can be okay. But links to sites, publications, organisations, etc. that are persistently hostile or insulting towards Objectivism or ARI or ARI people may be deleted or returned to the poster.
Posts that are considered to be direct or indiect forms of ARI or Ayn Rand "bashing" won't get through.
Links to sites which in turn link to AR-bashers or ARI-bashers may be deleted or may be sent through, but identified. This is at the list-owner's discretion. In any case the general assumption with links is that they are included for study purposes only, and not as an endorsements. i.e. As SPUNE links
Speaking of "bashing", it's worth noting that PRODOS list Moderators don't like any sort of "bashing" including: Christianity/libertarian/Objectivism/etc. -bashing.
Criticism: Okay, Good, Welcome. Bashing: Bad, Bad, and Very Bad.
Please note: Although most PRODOS lists are NOT Objectivist lists as such, the list owner, PRODOS, is a dedicated, ARI-friendly Objectivist and rather sensitive on this subject.
To repeat: Acceptance of Ayn Rand's philosophy, Objectivism, or support of ARI is NOT required. A wide range of differing views are welcome.
Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.
If the Moderator, when reading your message, can't understand what you mean or can't follow what you're saying, or if the moderator thinks that list members may not get it, your post may be declined. You may be asked to resubmit it - but not necessarily. This is at the discretion of the Moderator.
Alternatively, the Moderator might insert [in brackets] a "Probably means" or "Understood as meaning" interpretation or restatement or rephrasing of your words.
For instance: If the message uses highly esoteric language. Or, because English is not your first language, your manner of expression proves far too awkward to folow. Or the message has relied on an 'in' joke. Etc.
Please keep in mind that a very broad range of individuals join PRODOS lists and what is perfectly clear to you may not be clear to others.
There are, however, many things that can be taken for granted. For instance, on the AmericanIdeals list, that Capitalism is good and Socialism and other forms of Statism are destructive is assumed. Generally, that Creationism and literal interpretations of the Bible are absurd.
Special treatment is given to certain words if they're used within a post. They include: Objectivist, Objectivism, Ayn Rand, libertarian, Libertarian, Christian, Jesus, Conservative. And there are others.
The use of these words is monitored and is, to some extent, at the discretion of the list Moderator dealing with any particular post, and ultimately at the discretion of the List Owner.
Typical examples of what would draw the attention of a Moderator:
"Fahrenheit" is a unit of measuring temperature. Water freezes at 32' F (ice) and boils at 212' F (steam). The average temperature of the human body is 98.6'F. According to Ray Bradbury, paper burns at 451'. The temperature in Melbourne, Australia is here :-)
The Moderator may require contributors to excercise greater than usual restraint, caution, politeness, cool-headedness, etc. when it comes to topics he or she deems to be highly charged, hot, emotional, or explosive.
For instance: disagreements on abortion, homosexuality, religion, etc.
A Moderator may edit a message by snipping or substituting words in order to bring down the temperature of a post or thread to a level conducive to cool-headed discourse. In fact, once a thread or post has a "Fahrenheit Alert" Moderators are required to "over edit" posts.
The higher the "fahrenheit" of an issue the greater the cooling effect of the Moderator. This applies only to issues considered to be on-topic and appropriate. Posts that are off-topic or inappropriate are simply declined.
The Moderator and List Owner may also require a particular format or protocol to be used when discussing certain issues. This will be explained on the list, at the time.
The problem with this sort of post (or section of a post) is that, even with the best intentions, it can come across as very condescending. It conveys the notion that the reader is really not equipped to handle this "grown ups" stuff just yet.
In other words it's like saying to the reader, "Get back to me after you've done your homework. This stuff is way over your head son."
This is usually not the intention. The actual intention is probably to try and be as helpful as possible. Nevertheless the Moderator may act on a "homework assignment" - especially if there is a sensitive issue at hand.
The other problem with a "homework assignment" is that it may suggest the list is an inadequate or redundant forum for raising the really important issues - and that the poster's or someone else's website or book, etc. is the place for serious people to go. Or that this matter has already been dealt with elsewhere, so why bother.
Please try to format your posts like this one.
Ralph Waldo Emerson: "People seem not to see that their opinion of the world is also a confession of character."
Inflamatory, "personal," or rude remarks within messages to other list members may get snipped or edited, or the post may be declined.
However, on-list or off-list rudeness to or about the Moderators or List Owner may get the poster suspended or permanantly banned from a list. So don't do it. It's annoying, it's unnecessary and the Moderators don't need that sort of nonsense. They are not your Mommy and they are not your therapist. They are volunteers doing their best, trying to maintain and enforce the high standards that PRODOS lists are known for. Respect them and appreciate them. Or else.
Of course it's very rare that a list member will be rude in this way. Nearly all of the thousands of individuals who join PRODOS lists have excellent manners and are very considerate. PRODOS lists tend to attract positive and pleasant people. That's how we like it.
FLO = Fast Lane Option
factor = Format, Author, Content, Thread, Other
Submitted posts are usually dealt with in the order they arrive. However, on some of the very busy PRODOS discussion groups, the Moderators may give priority - the "Fast Lane Option" - to some posts based on 4 criteria:
F = Format: Posts/messages that are well formatted and require minimal or no editing get to jump the queue - even over the other "factors" listed below. That's assuming, of course, they are on-topic, etc.
Also, posts that require a lot of work to make them presentable may be returned to the poster with a request to check the guidelines (this page) and resubmit. If you could please do your best to format your posts nicely, the Moderators would greatly appreciate that. No need to get uptight about it - just do your best. Thanks :-)
A = Author: Consistently, reliably good authors/contributors, or forum members with special positions eg. the technical advisor on one of the Science lists, get special treatment.
This can be done on a temporary, say, weekly basis - or on a permanent basis. It doesn't guarantee that that author's posts will always get through, simply that the Moderators will check anything that comes in from that author and "process" it before all others.
C = Content: Posts with very interesting, urgent, compelling, etc. content may get moved up the queue. For instance, "breaking news"
T = Thread: A particular thread may be given special treatment at times and posts on that thread get to "jump the queue." For instance, one dealing with a current campaign matter. Or a thread that is about to be wound down may get its posts dealt with first in order to facilitate a tidy finish.
OR = Other: Other criteria.
A Moderator may edit phrasing to make it read as the view of the poster - rather than as an established, widely agreed, obvious or objective viewpoint.
In effect to change a "This is so ..." statement to an "I think thus ..." or "I believe thus ..." or "In my opinion ..." statement.
No, this is not Subjectivism. Nor is it the notion that all views must be treated as equally valid. And it's not the denial of absolute truths or the denial of objectivity either.
If a statement is expressed as a fact, or may be read as stating a fact, but is actually an opinion, it would get modified by the Moderator to read as the personal opinion of the poster. But please note: opinions are not a "lower species" to facts. Opinions include: values, judgements, preferences, personal perspectives, likes and dislikes, moral evaluations, etc. What is life without such things!? In fact what would a discussion list be without personal opinions?!
Personalizing an expressed view has the effect of inviting further discussion. When I say "I think thus" about an issue, the other person will respond with respect for my viewpoint and will feel invited to express his/her viewpoint.
Also, the other person will become interested in how I have constructed, how I have arrived at, my viewpoint. "Ah! You think thus," they will say. "Why do you think this way? And here is what I think and why I think it ..." That's the sort of thing that PRODOS lists wish to encourage.
Often it is assumed when someone says "This is how things are ..." that they in fact mean "As I see it, this is how things are ..." If the context of the rest of the post makes that clear, it's unlikely the Moderator will tamper with the message. There is some discretion applied on this point.
A Moderator may sometimes 'over-edit' a post if he/she feels the post or the thread needs some cooling down. Also, sometimes a post can be "personalized" because in its current form it (inadvertantly) comes across as "parental." or impatient sounding.
The best posts are those which advance ideas, stimulate discussion, present a well-reasoned viewpoint or argument.
These are posts that have both sound mind and solid muscle in sufficient quality and quantity. Such posts are worth reading and responding to.
The Moderator looks forward to sending through such posts. They put a warm smile on his face!
That's because he knows that such posts are what make list members appreciate being subscribed to the list. Such posts cause members to *recommend* the list to their friends and colleagues.
However, a Moderator may decline a post that he considers "underweight" or not of sufficient interest to the list or which he doesn't feel makes a significant enough contribution to the discussion.
For instance, if a list member responds to a message with nothing but a comment such as:
"That makes sense" or "Good point" or "I know what you mean, but I have to think about it some more."
... his/her post would probably be declined. There are exceptions to this.
Such posts are termed "underweight".
A message may also be treated as underweight and "returned" to the poster if it addresses a matter which is considered a very low priority or of insufficient general interest.
Posts written in far too casual a manner may also be considered "underweight" and declined. In this way PRODOS lists differ from many other lists. The point is that if the poster hasn't put much effort into his post, why should the reader?
Another way a post may be considered "underweight" is if it doesn't have sufficient supporting arguments or information to back up its position. If a post simply states a conclusion without indicating the basis for reaching that conclusion it may be declined or returned to the poster as "underweight". Interestingly, both an ignorant person and a very knowledgeable person are capable of this sort of underweight post. The ignorant person because he doesn't know what he's talking about, and the highly knowledgeable person because he sees the issue and all the arguments so clearly and thorougly that the whole thing seems just so incredibly obvious to him.
