[Seattle-editorial] Re: f------ spam: hide it?

[Jeremy G Kahn]

Judy wrote:

>We absolutely must empower our editors to delete and take the rath -- no editor can please everyone all the time -- the important thing is to keep in mind serving the community.  Please consider it in this light, the few people who are actively monitoring the wire do not have the time to follow this policy and hid useless posts.  Thorough monitoring is not happening because it's too much trouble.  We have got to empower people to make decisions and take action or nothing will get done.
>  
>
I agree. That's why I said that it's okay to go ahead and do things.  
But I also think it's important to have accountability. Somewhere, 
somehow, some way there has to be a way of finding out what the editors 
are doing. Otherwise we get into shouting matches about "censorship" as 
well.

>I for one don't really care about checking what useless post has been hidden, they are not that important, and I don't really want to have to waste my time opening email to alert me that a useless post is hidden.   
>  
>
Okay. You don't have to read them.  We could ask people to put a header 
on the email that says [Newswire-maint] so that the subject alone is 
enough for you to delete the emails unread.

>We need to be using our time efficiently -- making media not hand wringing over questionable posts.  We all know what is good.  And I trust other's sensibilities for what is useless.  
>  
>
I still want to have accountability -- we should be able to determine 
what is being done.

If everyone else agrees that keeping this record of what's been done 
isn't important, then I will stand aside, but I feel that this concern 
is legit and important. Please don't brush it off as "we all know what 
needs to be done".  We can't count on *always* agreeing.  Your nutcase 
may be my voice of dissent.

--j