Cindy Haglund (1:124/6308.20) wrote to Roger Nelson at 10:11 on 02 Mar 2007:

 CH>  (Perplexed). But that is part of why there has to be a moderator
 CH> to do the distributing if there's no robot moderator doing it? BTW
 CH> Doghouse and Able were also "moderated" by Bobby Queen and were in
 CH> the same dead zone as CK when I helped liven them back up. DH and
 CH> Able are both just starting to pick up a tiny bit again. Need we do
 CH> the same OOHOHOHHHH horrifics song and dance with those two as this
 CH> one?

Not necessarily but robot moderators do stop functioning.  If this echo
still had an elisted moderator, Roger could not have updated the listing. 

 CH>  I like how you put that. Let me hazard a guess as to what Maurice
 CH> may have meant and then I'll check his response to compare. Maybe
 CH> it's a bit hard to believe we need a person moderator for
 CH> distribution when a robot one will serve that function. Sort of
 CH> shoots the whole need of moderator for distribution argument to
 CH> heck and back, don't you think?

Having been a moderator of several echoes over a decade and having listed
several of them for distribution over that time and them removed them, my
experience has been that it is much easier to cancel distribution or remove
them from the Elist if one is an active moderator.
  
Take care,

Steven Horn (steven.horn{at}northwestel.net)
Moderator, ALASKA_CHAT 
--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+