Conference 7.286::digital

    I agree.  This is absolutely the most over-moderated conference in
    existence.  With the number of moderators moderating, absolutely
    everything will get to one of them.
    
    I've been simmering about this for a while.  You can't ask a simple
    question and get an answer.  Yesterday alone there must have been half
    a dozen "not in this conference, see MUMBLY instead".  Often, I'm
    interested in the question and would like to see the answer, but not in
    adding another conference to my already-too-large notebook.
    
    Other "DEC" related topics (like JH) are "too hot".
    
    Beginning to look like the signal-to-noise ratio of this conference is
    tending towards the noise, and I'm going to consider dropping it.

    JH has everything to do with Digital, and yes, I have persued my issues
    through personnel who did nothing for me.  They are good at saying 'no'
    and 'call this person'.  I guess overmoderation comes with the territory
    when reading this conference.  The fact that this issue keeps coming up
    should tell the mods something is wrong...
    
    Brad.

    If you think that my TEMPORARY closing of that topis is censorship,
    then we live in different worlds - and you'd be wrong. As I said, I
    temporarily closed the topic so that the Moderators could discuss how
    to handle this issue.
    
    I plain don't understand why you're all so keen to damn the Moderators
    when you acknowlege that this is a difficult judgement call.
    
    As to "something being wrong" with JH becoming obvious to the
    Moderators, so what? This ISN'T the place to fix JH's problems and none
    of the Moderators have any powers to "fix" problems described herein.
    
    Now this topic is redundant as I'm re-opening the original, perhaps you
    can go there and read my next entry, before accusing us of "fascist
    overModeration" or whatever the current OTT description of us is.
    
    - ���

    Andy, I'm not accusing the mods as being "fascist".  Rather, I fail
    to see the discussion of JH to be in conflict with this conference's
    polices.  
    
    After re-reading note 1.last, I still fail to see the problem with
    the discussion.  For example, I have re-posted the first several
    paragraphs of 1.last below.  

    
    Mark.
       
          <<< HUMAN::DISK$HUMAN_WRKD:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
                          -< The DEC way of working >-
================================================================================
Note 1.13                         Introduction                          13 of 13
HUMAN::CONKLIN "Peter Conklin"                      239 lines  27-MAR-1988 22:31
                               -< Introduction >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This file for issues about our Company, how we work here, how we could
    work better, etc...

    Speak what's on your mind, even if it's a complaint or criticism of
    someone, some group, or the company as a whole. However, don't forget
    some basic guidelines of behavior in expressing yourself "in public." 
    Although this file is restricted to Digital employees, remember that
    you are addressing a large and diverse group of people. What you write
    here will be on record for many years. See below for some advice on
    propriety.
    
    And remember, noone has never been fired out of DEC because he/she
    tells what he/she thinks. But that is no reason to be indiscreet. Use
    common sense and prudence. Don't write something you may later regret. 
    Your frank opinion about someone you specify by name may be considered
    damaging to that person.
  
    Also be mindful of the interest of the company. Don't make remarks
    that may result in legal liability for Digital.
    
    This conference is moderated by a group of volunteers. We don't expect
    to do much if any "moderating", as we trust that commonsense and
    prudence will prevail without intervention by the moderator. Therefore,
    we do not feel that any rules need to be made. If this trust be
    violated, however, we reserve the right to "do what is right"
    considering circumstances. If you feel that someone has been imprudent
    in their wording, please mail them your suggestion (use SEND/AUTHOR).
    In an emergency, you can SEND/MEMBER to get to the moderators.

    Lest it needs be said, we will resist attempts at censorship or
    harrassment by anyone.

	But the point IS is what can be done in a notesfile?? If it's
	Personnels butt that needs to be kicked to get them to own up
	to the problem, then kick Personnels butt..  THEY own the
	responsiblity of correcting the problem.. Follow the ODP all
	the way up to see that it's fixed.. From the talks Jack Smith
	gave, it sounds like he'd be bloody well interested in what you
	have to say.

	Try their and then reporting your findings would be interesting 
	reading.. War stories of how you wacked yourself with the WeedEater
	and had to go to the hospital and JH wouldn't pay are getting REALLY
	boring to read and aren't serving any purpose..

	And remember, the moderators ARE in fact looking out for YOUR best
	interests here.. The sh1t has hit the fan in the past with regard to
	notesfiles and if it wasn't for the work of some moderators, I dare
	say that Noting as you see it today would have gone the way of
	Woods Meetings and DEC-sponsored parties.. ie: Old-DEC history..

	So lighten up a little, ok?

						mike

    MIKE,
    
    I prefer 'The fertilizer has hit the ventilator'.
    
    Gil
    

    'Something being wrong' was with respect to the moderation of this
    file.  There have been several discussions in this file about the
    moderation.  If you don't like hearing about it, do us the favor.

    If you have a problem with the Moderation of this Notes Conference,
    then by all means mail the moderators with your thoughts on
    
		    	o what is wrong
    			o what should be done.
    
    To mail the DIGITAL Moderators, simply SEN/MEM at the Notes> prompt
    when the conference is open.
    
    Thanks very much,
    
    - ���

I must agree that the JH note doesn't belong here.  As it was aptly put I 
don't see how someones claim for being whacked by a weedeater has an 
effect on the way DEC works.  Now if the JH note was about how DEC choses 
medical benifits providers some small amout of war stories could be 
tolerated.  I believe that the moderators are doing a great job keeping 
this conference focused on the way DEC works and we work with and within 
DEC.  If folks really wanted to nit-pick almost any topic could be 
construed as effecting the way DEC works.  I don't like to nit-pick.  The 
sharper the focus of this conference the better it is.  I for one have been 
missing DR::BLINN's comments (an ex-moderator I believe) and have to assume
the reason they have stopped is that person got tired of the moderator 
bashing.  Also I would like to see more evidence of folks having direct 
comunication with the moderators instead of placing a note to do it.

Jilly

Do not forget that for those people in the U.S. not in HMOs (those people who
are complaining about the service provided by John Hancock), the real complaint
is not with the insurance company -- John Hancock does not insure DEC employees.

It is Digital paying your medical benefits.

It is Digital allowing John Hancock to make it difficult to get Digital to pay
your medical benefits.

It is a Digital issue.

/john

                re. -1
                
                Excellent point.
                
                
                As for some generalities - I believe that any benifit,
        service or other item that DEC provides for employees should be
        proper grist for the mill of this conference. The only
        exception(s) I'll make to that are those topics for which there
        is a conference specificaly set up (such as the DCU). After all,
        our benifits are as much a part of our working conditions as our
        office furniture, lighting and bosses.
                
                A short specific - The topic on JH which prompted this
        topic may in fact be a lot of whining, BUT it also contains a
        lot of information that can be used by others to help them with
        their dealings with JH and what they should be looking for. All
        too many of us (I'm guilty too) just accept what is told to us
        by officialdom as THE TRUTH when it often isn't. This topic is
        alerting us to some problems that have occured and will probably
        occur again (at least for a while).
                
                /s/     Bob

RE: < Note 855.11 by REGENT::GETTYS "Bob Gettys N1BRM 235-8285" >
>                  -< A lot of people are getting too touchy >-
>                A short specific - The topic on JH which prompted this
>        topic may in fact be a lot of whining, BUT it also contains a
>        lot of information that can be used by others to help them with
>        their dealings with JH and what they should be looking for. All
>        too many of us (I'm guilty too) just accept what is told to us
>        by officialdom as THE TRUTH when it often isn't. This topic is
>        alerting us to some problems that have occured and will probably
>        occur again (at least for a while).
Agreed.  Using the JH note as an example...I wouldn't have known about the
double deductible unless I read it there.  The officialdom belief.  Now, I'll
check it out (I did save the JH claim results forms).

As to the problem statement after problem statement in the JH note, if I
don't want to read anymore about it, I'll just hit 'NEXT UNSEEN'.  But,
I am interested so I read them thru.  I don't envy the moderator's because
they have to review each for content not within 1.last.  Maybe it's a
difference in perspective.  Moderators getting tired of *having* to read
problem statement after problem statement.  Personally I don't mind, it
doesn't seems too many other do, and if you do hit 'NEXT UNSEEN'.

I haven't been in this conference long enough to agree or disagree over the
moderation issue, but I do know from other conferences that overmoderation
leads to loss of interest/desire in the using the conference -- and ultimatly
no conference...and I'd hate to see that happen here.

Dan

    
    re .9:
    
>I for one have been 
>missing DR::BLINN's comments (an ex-moderator I believe) and have to assume
>the reason they have stopped is that person got tired of the moderator 
>bashing.
    
    Oh really. Strikes me that LESLIE::LESLIE is a nom de plume used by the
    erstwhile DR::BLINN. The overzealous style of moderation seems to be
    identical.
    
    I wish the moderators would go read that note 1.last-1 by Peter
    Conklin, that was posted earlier in this topic, and moderate the
    conference in the spirit that I read in that note.
    
    Dave
    

    RE: .10 and .13
    
    Dr::Blinn is still a very active moderator.  
    
    Just FYI

    And if they are tired of moderating they can always quit.
    Nobody is holding a gun to their heads!  Since they volunteered
    for it time and unbiased moderation is their problem, why do
    the rest have to suffer?

    To be fair, comments that blast moderators for doing a job that
    99 & 44/100rds of us would not want, are inappropriate for this or
    any conference.                   
    
    I don't believe in censorship, nor having one person's beliefs
    overshadow others, but someone must assume the responsibility for
    keeping the conference within the bounds of intent.
    
    If previous writers have an issue with the moderators, I strongly
    suggest that they personally contact them and discuss it; as opposed
    to making it an issue here.
    
    Jay

    Re:
    
>    If previous writers have an issue with the moderators, I strongly
>    suggest that they personally contact them and discuss it; as opposed
>    to making it an issue here.
    
    What makes you think that they haven't? Every time in the past that I
    have complained to moderators about overzealous moderation policy
    it hasn't made any difference. The obnoxious (at least to me it is)
    censorship and 'I know what's best for you attitude' just continues.
    
    In my previous note I was mainly pointing out that recent moderation
    practices are not in keeping with a 'conference policy' note in 1.*.
    
    Dave

		Moderation is an art,

		and everyone's a critic.

    Ahhh... dejavu.
    
    I refer you to topic #355 in this conference, begun by me in 1987,
    titled,
    
    "What CAN we NOTE these days ?"
    
    .. exactly 500 notes ago.
    
    karl

    Re: -.1   DOESN"T THAT GIVE SOME HINT TO SOME PEOPLE?

    Noting here or in any other conference, should be within the bounds of
    common sense. That includes trying to be relevant to the stated purpose
    of the conference in which your notes are entered and not writing ill
    of those who cannot defend themselves (such as people, bodies,
    corporations etc that don't have access to this conference).
    
    The Moderators of DIGITAL include Tom Blinn, Peter Conklin myself and
    others. We do our best. If you have genuine problems with the way that
    this conference is moderated, I sincerely suggest that VAXmail to us is
    the way to enter a dialogue, rather than yet another bitching session.
    Such mail is genuinely considered, discussed and then replied to. Those
    that mailed me regarding the John Hancock note know this, for instance.
    
    By the way, please note that the John Hancock note has been re-opened,
    just as I said it would be, after consultation amongst the Moderators.
    
    As Greg Robert said, everyone's a critic in this company and I know that
    the Moderators of DIGITAL, including myself, accept that and will live
    with it, happily. We're Noters too, don't forget, most of whom have
    been enjoying the benefits of Notes for years, in my case 6 years come
    August 22.
    
    In the meantime, try sticking to the purpose of this conference:
    discussing life within Digital and its vagaries.
    
    We thank you.
    
    - ���
    

    Well, dealing with JH is certainly life as we know it at Digital, and
    it certainly has vagaries.  Re-opening that topic was the right thing
    to do.

    A good moderator must wear two hats at once - keeping in mind both the
    interests of their employer, Digital, and that of the noting community.
    In most cases, there is no conflict, but when there is, the needs
    of the corporation should be paramount.  It's often difficult to make
    this call, and many times a moderator is sympathetic to the cause, but
    he or she also understands, often through experience, the risks
    that are unacceptable.  And when the case is not clearcut, it is
    wiser to err on the side of caution.
    
    I believe that Andy did the right thing in calling a halt to the
    name-calling that went on in the Hancock note.  He has stated
    repeatedly, and I certainly agree (as do the rest of the DIGITAL
    moderators, I believe) that a calm and reasoned discussion of
    one of Digital's major benefit plans is certainly appropriate for
    this conference.  If some noters wish to start screaming about
    censorship and "free speech", that is their right, but, truthfully,
    the concepts of free speech don't apply in NOTES conference files
    that exist on the network of systems owned by Digital Equipment 
    Corporation.
    
    I ask that when people are angry and want to use a conference as
    a weapon against a person, group or company, that they think again,
    and again.  And if in doubt, ask a moderator for guidance.  (There
    are enough of us, and we certainly don't all think alike, but we share
    one common goal - to do the right thing.)
    
    On a related subject, another matter that moderators get a lot of
    flack for is when they try to keep a conference focused on its
    topic.  Noting would be utter chaos if people put whatever they
    wanted in random conferences, just because those are the ones they
    already read.  Please take a moment and try to find the most
    appropriate conference for your topic.  It will make the conferences
    more useful to us all.
    
    					Steve

    As a long-time reader of this conference, I've often had to refrain
    from jumping up and posting a reply to everything I see here. We
    DECcies are a diverse bunch, ranging fully in every sense along
    the spectrum of reaction. But I think the ones who feel strongest
    about an issue (drug testing, off-site rights, etc.) are usually
    the ones who post notes. The middle ground tends to be under-
    represented.

    Personally, I have a great deal of respect for the impossible task
    the moderators are asked to do and would like to make a public
    statement to them to carry on and do the best they can. They're
    only trying to apply the "Do what's right" principle as they see
    it.
    
    Besides, anyone who could come up with a horizontal ��� face instead
    of the usual 8^) vertical can't be all bad.
    
    	/Marvin_who_once_had_to_officially_"investigate"_the_SEXCETERA_conf

    I get confussed when .23 meantions name calling.  I reread the notes
    about JH to find it.  Guess I'm a poor reader.
    
    I would hope that moderators would ask that a reply/note be rewritten
    if such were found instead of closing off discussion on a whole
    topic.   Areas where there is question on weither or not a note
    doesn't belong, or a topic is not right, then the moderators may
    consider concenses prior to taking any action.

    Maybe were could establish guidlines for moderators ;-).
    
    There are some lessons to be learnt here.  I think the proper thing
    to do is to grip via EMAIL first before griping here.  I did, so
    I feel justifing in talking here now.  Of course when only a small
    % of the moderator bother addressing you after being written too,
    it doesn't encourage one to do it again.
    
    I think all should reread 1.  if it no longer applies, rewrite it!
    All of us know how to play by the rules.  Its when we get blind
    sided that some of our fustrations show through.
    
    ed
    

   I once said in my many correspondence with moderators of this conference 
   I wish you would count to 100 then read 1.last before write locking 
   a topic.  I've personally found that when I objected via mail it is 
   usually reopened.  Some time after several mail messages but none the 
   less reopened.  Witch brings me back to my first point.  Moderators 
   should be much less quick to write lock a conference.  

   One other point.  I believe Andy Leslie works in the UK.  I would think 
   (unless he's on temporary assignment from the US) that he has only one 
   option for medical coverage, i.e. National Health (government paid health 
   coverage is the right of everyone living in the UK).  At least that's the 
   way it worked when I lived over there.  I too have only one option here in 
   Austin, Texas and that's the DEC Health Plan (i.e. John Hancock).  How 
   that effects my welfare is very mush a part of "DEC and the way we work", 
   and belongs in this conference.  

   /Bob Flatley

    re .26 - clarification (and a slight rathole)
    
    > I would think  (unless he's on temporary assignment from the US) that
    > he has only one  option for medical coverage, i.e. National Health
    > (government paid health  coverage is the right of everyone living in
    > the UK).
    
    It hasn't been that way for quite a few years now - Digital in the UK
    (and most other European countries too) provides health insurance for
    all employees, so that they can have the benefits of quality care in a
    timely manner. The National Health service has suffered very badly
    under the present administration and waiting lists for non-critical
    procedures are often years long. For normal medical office visits (what
    is called the 'primary care physician' here in the U.S.), 99%+ of
    people go to an NHS doctor in a clinic close to their home. Other than
    income taxes which pay for the NHS, there are no charges for any
    services provided by the doctor or any services of an NHS hospital to
    which he refers you. Prescription charges have to be paid but are not
    exhorbitant when compared to costs here. All family planning
    prescriptions are free (or were when I left a little over a year ago).
    
    I've never had to use the benefits of the medical insurance in the UK
    but I know many others that have and I don't think there are as many
    problems there as I seem to hear about JH here (I personally use an
    HMO, so have no dealings with JH except for dental work). There is
    almost certainly a discussion on this if you're interested in one of
    the UK conferences.
    
    Sorry for the rathole. I'll go back to sleep now.
    
    Jon

As an infrequent contributor, but a fairly up-to-date reader of this 
conference and the Marketing conference among others, I'd like to see much, 
much less action taken by moderators. Certain individuals have taken it upon 
themselves to do a task that doesn't need doing. Here at Digital we're 
supposed to trust each other to do the "right" thing. Well, let's do it!
Some of us may not do the right thing, but NO ONE other than a person's 
management has the right to tell someone what they can or cannot say or type.

I am the "moderator" of some smaller conferences and the only actions I 
take are for housekeeping. I personally would rather risk having a conference 
shut down than to continue to deal with the attitude and actions of the 
moderators in this important conference.

From what I can see, the only reason there are moderators is for those 
individuals who are interested in wielding their authority over others.

Jim

    Jim,
    	ad hominem attacks on the Moderators don't further your cause.
    Generalities don't help either. The fact that you have never actully
    contacted us about any particular incident makes me wonder why you
    bothered with -1.
    
    	If you have specific matters to discuss with us, please feel free
    to do so. The best way of contacting us is via the SEND/MEM command
    from the Notes> prompt.
    
    Thanks,
    
    - ���
    Co_Moderator

Since there are 11 (!) different moderators of this conference, I thought it
would be a more efficient use of Digital's resources to post it here.

What I've said has been said before a number of times. The only result I can
see of my sending my previous reply to the moderators would be a VAXmail debate
with 11 people... My feeling is there should be one or, at most two
moderators who do nothing more than perform housekeeping. Let the readers and
contributors of this file police it themselves... 

Jim 

    Have you actually tried to send mail to the moderators, even one of
    them, about a real, specific problem?  If not, then I suggest your
    generalized complaints in .28 and .30 are not constructive.
    
    I have sent mail to the moderators with specific issues, and I have
    always gotton a plausible response within 24 hours.  I haven't always
    agreed with it, but it has never been obviously unreasonable, IMHO.

    Hi
    
    (IM{H}O)
    Im one of the moderators of this conference. As a group, we
    range from young to old, conservative to liberal. All of our
    decisions are by consensus, and we always try to do the right thing
    for Digital Equipment Corporation.
    
    In the past, Ive butted heads with the other mods over whether
    the write locking of a given topic is appropriate. My personal views
    are considerably more "liberal" than some of the other moderators,
    but usually, when I view their decisions in the cold light of
    "what is in the best interest of Digital Equipment Corporation",
    I find I agree with them.  
    
    FYI, when somebody sends us mail via SEND/MEMBERS, one of us usually
    volunteers to handle the correspondance, rather than burying
    the person with 11 responses. We also archive such mail for
    future reference. 
    
    The duties we perform are not a huge burden, neither are they
    richly rewarding.  It is simply a job that needs doing, and we
    are doing it. 
    
    Your comments are welcome, as always...
    
    Rick LeVine
    Co Moderator
    HUMAN::DIGITAL