Dear group,
           I support the continued role of a moderator. To me the analogy of
censorship in society at large does not hold up. (This analogy has been used in
support of not having a moderator.) I am against censorship, and I have the
freedom to choose which movies to go to, which books to read. In this case,
however, I have signed on to a certain discussion group to engage in certain
kinds of dialogue--which does not include hate-mongering or just plain abusive
attack. So my feeling is, a group that comes together, like Screen-l, has the
right to determine what its goals and interests are; this is a different issue
from supporting censorship as a social control strategy. And, if this seems ex-
clusive, I think there is a difference between excluding out of hatred or pre-
judice and excluding those who hate and prejudge. Of course that becomes highly
subjective in its own right, but . . . .
                                        Frank Burke
                                        Dept. of Film Studies
                                        Queen's University
                                        Kingston, ON, Can K7L 3N6
I too encourage people to write in to help us formulate policy. Though the
above is my opinion as of the moment, it is not engraved in stone. Freedom of
expression is a sensitive issue, and I am always uncomfortable taking a posi-
tion that seems to advocate limiting it.