> Sabaydii Tzianeng  et all,
> Soon after SCL was created (before SCH) we pondered on the same points you
> are talking about and taking a lead from Singapore.Moderated we submitted
> for a creation of Laos.moderated but we failed by only in the teens of vote,
> not within our community as we always lobby first. The vote was lost due to
> external/outsider freedom of speech/rights groups voting againts the idea.
> Anyone can propose to set a group it is just a process, groups are created
> everyday.
>
> What you are asking for exist today in the form or private discussion boards
> e.g. mailling lists and webboards where the site and members define the
> rules of engagement and whether moderators are needed.
>
> SCL, SCH,SHT etc. are open forums where everything go, no moderator, no ID
> check (except big brother CAN/DO track you down). NETethics guide such as
> referred to by Pao is a rule of chaos, we self govern and self control,
> common sense, consensus and respect(for self & others) rule, the abusers
> just abuse themselves.
>
> On the other side of the coin, strict rules will just deter the dynamism of
> a forum. This informal channel of discussion has its merits that info
> otherwise might not come out. For instance the official 'demonstration park'
> in Bejing where a mere application see you arrested.
>
> It is an issue of noise to info ratio! read between the lines. If some
> frustrate you so much most Internet News client can be setup to filter them
> out or you could use your executive power of the delete key.
>
> Looking back it has not been so bad and it serving its purpose well.
> Generally I can say we made more friends than enemies, that is invaluable in
> building a bridge of understanding.
>
> Sookdii