Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    Well, I can only answer the first two questions. The answers
    are yes and yes. It's obviously possible as there are no technical
    issues preventing it.
    
    Yes someone would object. I would.
    
    Let me ask a question of my own. What is the added value of having
    a woman moderator?
    
    				Alfred
   

    I too would object.
    Why a 'woman' moderator in a conference called "Men notes"?
    

       re .0:
       
       First of all, the moderator's gender shouldn't make any difference
       whatsoever -- decisions should be based on good judgment, not
       personal plumbing.  One of the good features of this conference is
       that the moderator (or is it plural?) is/are nearly invisible.
       This is in stark contrast to the women's conference, where
       moderators seem always to be seen doing things -- moving notes,
       taking polls and registering voters, deleting notes, and just
       generally disrupting things. 
       
       Does the author of .0 perceive a problem with the way that this
       conference is being moderated?
       
       --Mr Topaz

    This issue actually came up a while ago, when we were short a
    moderator  However, my personal feeling is that MENNOTES should
    be guided by men, and WOMANNOTES should be guided by women.  If
    it were to come about that MENNOTES needed a moderator, and that
    the best candidate for the job was a woman, that would be ok.
    But she would have to be a known and respected noter in order to
    be accepted by the readers of this conference.
    
    Moderating conferences such as this one, WOMANNOTES and HUMAN_RELATIONS
    is hard work, due to the high emotion level that tends to run
    through the discussions.  Yes, the MENNOTES moderators DO delete
    inappropriate notes, though when this is done, an explanation
    (and the deleted text) is ALWAYS returned to the authors.  We feel
    that deletion and resubmission is much less disruptive than hiding
    notes and having endless arguments in the conference as to whether
    a note should or should not be hidden.  I believe in "pro-active"
    moderation.
    
    I cannot recall any lengthy note strings that have been deleted
    here, but if there were, they were primarily "trashnotes", and the
    replies were returned to the author.  Sometimes an author deletes
    the base note, making all the replies difficult to understand.
    This is hard to deal with, but we do the best we can.
    
    Indeed, the MENNOTES moderators try to be inconspicuous and tolerant,
    but when action is needed we don't hesitate.  I think this results
    in a better and more useful conference for all the noters.
    
    				Steve

    Very good points Mr Topaz. No, as I said, I have no problems with
    the moderation. More than anything, I was wondering out loud and
    thought I'd enter it for discussion.
    
    

    
    
  RE: .someone
    
    	Does this mean that if Mike Z. got a sex change he'd be
    	taken off the moderator list???
    
    							mike

       Hmmm..... Does this mean I can't be a moderator in the canine
    file??????
    
    
                Doghater

    You tempt me Rick, you really do.
    
    		Alfred

    I really do not care.....but......
    
    are there any men mod's in the "other" file?

    re .11 no
    
    To me it is a question of the comfort level of the members to
    keep the moderators the same a the file :-)

    Hey REK... 
    
    You can moderate "Happiness" if you want :-)
    
    (Teehee)
    
    G

    re: .7
    
    Have you seen the commercial advertising the cereal "Nut & Honey"?  The
    section where the cowboys all draw their guns when the cook responds to
    to "What's for breakfast?" saying what sounds like "Nothing, Honey"?
    
    re: .5
    
    I agree with everything Steve said, except I've never been fond of the
    [non-]word "pro-active".  I'll admit to having used "functionality",
    however.
                                                                        
    - M

    re: .11 - .15
    
    Btw - who moderates SOAPBOX ? 
    (if personality/sexual persuasion are guidelines for morderators ) ?

	Think about it for a moment ........ ?
    
    By saying that "one person would be better than another, BECAUSE
    of their sexual persuasion" ... is  a SEXIST remark.
    
    I think it implies that there IS  a perceptual difference in the
    competency between the sexes, in that ONLY a woman can deal with
    WOMANNOTES and only a man can deal with  MENNOTES (as a moderator).

    (Which is EXZACTLY what some women have to say about MALE gynecologists
    and other "female disorder" medical practioners !)
       
    I think it'd be great to have a female moderator in MENNOTES (someone
    who can prostelitize and anylize and write lengthy dissertations
    on what is correct or isn't !).
    
    Hmm how does that work.
    
    Do we "elect" moderators, or are they self nominated/elected ? 
    
    I disagree with Steve. I don't think moderators are selected based
    on their abilities -but rather on what they're willing ot put up
    with.
    
    Bob
    

    RE: .14 Personality *is* used as a guideline for SOAPBOX moderator.
    The current moderator and most of the recent moderators were most
    definitely chosen. If you want details contact me off line. The prime
    requirements for SOAPBOX moderator are fast reading speed, time, a
    strong stomach and a willingness to take a lot of heat.
    
    If men and women can do exactly the same job moderating *this*
    conference then there is no reason why a woman should be a moderator.
    There is also no reason why someone has to be a moderator to
    "prostelitize and anylize and write lengthy dissertations
    on what is correct or isn't !" Anyone can do that. Enforcement is
    left to the moderators.
    
>    Do we "elect" moderators, or are they self nominated/elected ? 

    Both. The origional moderators of this conference (I was one) were
    self nominated. Those that have come since were selected by existing
    moderators. The ones I nominated I did so based on what I saw as
    ability. Moderators may leave because they can't take the heat but
    in conferences I've been involved in adding moderators ability has
    always been of prime concern.
    
    Ultimately even self nominated moderators are either confirmed or
    rejected. This conference started in part because some people were
    unhappy with the moderation of a similar conference. That conference
    is gone. This one continues. Draw what conclusion you wish but I
    think that moderation (through ability not willingness to take heat)
    had something to do with it.
    
    Moderators do help set the tone of a conference. Not control but
    influence. Women play a different tune then men. Mixed company
    sounds different then all one or the other. Mens choirs, womens
    choirs and mixed choirs all sound great but one does not replace
    one with an other and say they're the same.
    
    		Alfred
    

re: .0
    
        	I thought that this was called MENnotes???

    I see no need for having a female moderator just for the sake of
    having a female moderator.  On the other hand, I take offense at
    the idea that there is something wrong with having one.  If a woman
    wanted to moderate this conference, and she also fit the various
    qualifications, then it would be sexist to deny her that position
    on the basis of gender.
    
    Re .16
    
    >If men and women can do exactly the same job moderating *this*
    >conference then there is no reason why a woman should be a moderator.
    
    I see it in exactly the opposite way.  There is no reason why a
    woman *shouldn't* be a moderator.
    
    >Women play a different tune then men. Mixed company sounds different
    >then all one or the other. 
    
    I don't see that women are any different from men in the qualifications
    that determine effective conference moderation.  Moderation may set the
    tone to a degree, and it defines certain boundaries, but it also should
    be objective, and usually does not determine the actual content per se
    of a discussion within the determined boundaries.  It is the
    *participants* of a conference who determine the content of its
    discussions, and since we are allowing women to participate in this
    discussion (which I support), the content has been altered much more
    significantly then it would be by mixing the gender of the moderators. 
    
    I don't believe in "boy's only" clubs as a matter of principle,
    and I certainly believe that it makes no sense in this
    conference--either for the participants or the moderators.
    
    -- Mike

    
    RE: .17
    
    A woman might do just as good a job with the policy, system skills,
    and "mechanics" of this conference....just as a woman that moderates
    WOMMANNOTES can certainly handle a conference of another name, however,
    it is a real fact, that men and women do have different viewpoints.
    I wonder about how she would handle "sensitive" issues between men,
    which, MEN should work out, using their own logic and understanding,
    and it is another fact, that many men would be upset by a woman
    breaking into their "manly" discussion.  So... why rock the boat?
    
    I don't think there is a man moderating WOMMANNOTES, as I think
    the same would be true in that conference.  Many wommen get upset
    just because a man puts in a reply.  And, of course, many women
    want to post "no bulls."
    
    Again, I do feel a woman can moderate...ANY CONFERENCE, but I don't
    believe it would be an overall.... "positive," here.
    
    Kind Regards,
    -Dwight