On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Jim DeMaegt wrote: > Oh thank you very much! Yes, many thanks to Pamela and Nalini for the mild, intelligent, and fair moderation of their Pacifica lists! <snip> > Without such hard (and free - WOW - FOR FREE!) work by the "moderators" >and "owners" Pacifica would not have been Saved and Pacifica will not be >Saved again. The labor of dedicated volunteers is very much in the Pacifica tradition. > Free Speech (- of the very correct kind - no other Free Speech can be >allowed - "incorrect Free Speech" must be censored) is what is Saving >Pacifica and Saving all of America. Free speech is important to the maintenance of liberty, but is not sufficient to guarantee any salvation. Free speech may be abused, as we've seen by Jim's example. > Can we all work to get the current "moderators" and "owners" of the >Pacifica related listservs into more Power (POWER - that is POWER, POWER, >POWER - and hey also GLORY too) at Pacifica. While moderation of an internet list does require some of the qualities needed by a Pacifica Program Director, the two media are quite different, so the experience gained in one area is not sufficient for the other. > Can we all work to get Pacifica "moderated" and "owned" just like the >Pacifica related listservs are? - And for Free (WOW for FREE!) also. We could use the example of volunteer list moderators as a guide to balancing free speech and content quality in our volunteer work at Pacifica radio stations, and a period of recognized valuable volunteer work might eventually get us jobs at Pacifica -- but it is a lengthy process without any particular sort of guaranteed result. Pacifica content is largely produced by volunteers with significant creative independence. The final mix is "moderated" at each station by a Program Director, but each PD's ability to actually control content is greatly limited by multiple factors, and the job is not performed "for free." Since Pacifica is a public benefit corporation, neither it's hired management nor its elected governance really "owns" the Foundation. Though some exercise significant influence and others have fairly autonomous decision-making authority, all are more in the nature of caretakers or trustees. > Jim "'Moderation' and 'ownership' are what will Save (or "re-Save" as >the case may be) Pacifica and America - now if we can just decide who the >(true and great - really GREAT) 'moderators' and 'owners' of Pacifica will >be" D. Good programming decisions are an important part of what Pacifica needs in order to survive, but it also needs good business management. Governance representatives elected by the membership have a role in selecting or reviewing the performance of these managers, but the role is limited and occasional. The general membership does periodically need to decide who will represent them in this limited role. --Terry Goodman