Hello lorne;
How about this one. Is it welcome? or will it also come under censorship.
Your question would have been more credible if you had PM'ed the material to me first. Under the circumstances, I'll read it a little later this morning and post my thoughts.
As for your other questions:
What's OK? Reading a few hundred posts, especially the early ones, should give one a clear understanding of what we, those who share a common vision of our educational goals here, generally consider worthwhile.
Censorship: The censorship rules/posting guidelines (whatever...) on the Foreign Affairs Discussion Group are stricter in several ways than on other moderated forums one may have frequented. After 97,000 posts in 18 months and 500 bookmarks, things seem to be working about as well as one could expect I suppose.
Sources: There are too many good sources to list but if you stick to researching the major think tanks, the best foreign affairs journals, the major metro papers (NYT, WPost, LATimes, etc.), most any foreign paper (if presented within a context of why this is important to us), certain blogs (entertaining dot-connecting but otherwise rarely useful IMO), and the major foreign policy authors/wonks, you will be just fine.
We routinely vet new sources. An earlier examination of your reference demonstrated that certain political and religious axes were being ground by this website owner; this is unsuitable material for FADG. In general, highly politically oriented material has proven to be our greatest source of discord and thread bloat. Since there are so many more suitable sources for our educational needs, it's obvious where the real pay-off is...
If you have any suitability issues in the future, please feel free to PM the material to me and we can discuss its potential usefulness to the FADG poster/lurker community.
We each share a responsibility to the 500 others who are allocating time from their busy schedules to read our contributions. I take it seriously.
Thank you for your contributions,
--ken/fl |
