Please be advised that in news.groups.proposals there is an ongoing
Request for Discussion (RFD) to remove 99 moderated newsgroups,
including the following one(s) that may be of interest to readers of
this notice:
rec.arts.drwho.moderated
These groups have long been derelict due to the lack of a moderator.
If any readers of this notice are willing to serve as moderator for
any of these groups, and have the technical infrastructure to do so,
they are encouraged to contact the Big-8 Management Board by replying
by e-mail to this message. The Board is happy to advise prospective >moderators on the technical and procedural requirements.
To learn more about the RFD to remove these groups, and to contribute
to the discussion, please refer to the article in
news.groups.proposals with a similar subject as this one: ><news:[email protected]>
Comments on the RFD should take place in news.groups.proposals as
this is the only place the Board is guaranteed to monitor the
discussion. In particular, please do not post a follow-up *here* to
*this* article, as we are unlikely to see your reply.
--
Usenet Big-8 Management Board
https://www.big-8.org/
[email protected]
In article <vr1jjk$k3k$[email protected]>,
Usenet Big-8 Management Board <[email protected]> wrote:
Please be advised that in news.groups.proposals there is an
ongoing Request for Discussion (RFD) to remove 99 moderated
newsgroups, including the following one(s) that may be of
interest to readers of this notice:
rec.arts.drwho.moderated
These groups have long been derelict due to the lack of a
moderator.
If any readers of this notice are willing to serve as
moderator for any of these groups, and have the technical
infrastructure to do so, they are encouraged to contact the
Big-8 Management Board by replying by e-mail to this
message. The Board is happy to advise prospective
moderators on the technical and procedural requirements.
let it go!
The Doctor wrote:
In article <vr1jjk$k3k$[email protected]>, Usenet Big-8
Management Board <[email protected]> wrote:
Please be advised that in news.groups.proposals there is an
ongoing Request for Discussion (RFD) to remove 99 moderated
newsgroups, including the following one(s) that may be of
interest to readers of this notice:
rec.arts.drwho.moderated
These groups have long been derelict due to the lack of a
moderator.
If any readers of this notice are willing to serve as moderator
for any of these groups, and have the technical infrastructure to
do so, they are encouraged to contact the Big-8 Management Board
by replying by e-mail to this message. The Board is happy to
advise prospective moderators on the technical and procedural
requirements.
let it go!
Phew! I'm glad you said that Dave... when I saw that message from the
Big-8 Board I thought you might be the one person here that would
volunteer to become the moderator of RADWM!
(Again!) No vote would have been needed this time though... ;-)
My view is moderated groups equal censorship and go against the whole
idea behind Usenet... so yeah, let it go.
On 15/03/2025 8:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <vr1jjk$k3k$[email protected]>, Usenet Big-8
Management Board <[email protected]> wrote:
rec.arts.drwho.moderated
These groups have long been derelict due to the lack of
a moderator.
If any readers of this notice are willing to serve as
moderator for any of these groups, and have the
technical infrastructure to do so, they are encouraged
to contact the Big-8 Management Board by replying by
e-mail to this message. The Board is happy to advise
prospective moderators on the technical and procedural
requirements.
let it go!
Phew! I'm glad you said that Dave... when I saw that message
from the Big-8 Board I thought you might be the one person
here that would volunteer to become the moderator of RADWM!
I was EXPECTING Binky to stick his hand up .... but, maybe,
his High Powered ISP/NSP Business is keeping him too busy!!
My view is moderated groups equal censorship and go against
the whole idea behind Usenet... so yeah, let it go.
Never having been exposed to one, I couldn't possibly
comment!! ;-P
Daniel70 wrote:
On 15/03/2025 8:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <vr1jjk$k3k$[email protected]>, Usenet Big-8
Management Board <[email protected]> wrote:
rec.arts.drwho.moderated
These groups have long been derelict due to the lack of
a moderator.
If any readers of this notice are willing to serve as
moderator for any of these groups, and have the
technical infrastructure to do so, they are encouraged
to contact the Big-8 Management Board by replying by
e-mail to this message. The Board is happy to advise
prospective moderators on the technical and procedural
requirements.
let it go!
Phew! I'm glad you said that Dave... when I saw that message
from the Big-8 Board I thought you might be the one person
here that would volunteer to become the moderator of RADWM!
I was EXPECTING Binky to stick his hand up .... but, maybe,
his High Powered ISP/NSP Business is keeping him too busy!!
I really did think it would be something Dave might go for. He
probably has the right equipment too. Dave did go for the
moderator job when that group was first announced to counter all
the "noise" (word of the week!) here.
RADW isn't busy enough now though so we don't need a moderated
group. (IMO obviously.)
My view is moderated groups equal censorship and go againstNever having been exposed to one, I couldn't possibly
the whole idea behind Usenet... so yeah, let it go.
comment!! ;-P
Imagine somebody reading every one of your posts and deciding
what was acceptable content, or not, before letting it go
through to the actual group to be read? I'm sure moderation
works well on some Usenet groups but moderation as a system is
open to abuse as you are at the whim of the moderator(s) and
their individual opinions and tolerances. Moderation is another
word for censorship, as if the moderator doesn't like what you
say, your post gets stopped and doesn't 'appear'. So, censored!
3. Snipped replied-to content to a couple of sentences relevant to context
for each point being made
Oh, I think a little technical moderation can be a good thing.
Imagine if this newsgroup permitted all messages that:
1. Contained 10 or more words of original content (A/I
generated text,and large scale copy/pasting from other sources
not permitted - a link, with personal commentary, would be the
right way to go here)
2. Did not personally defame or attack another poster
3. Snipped replied-to content to a couple of sentences
relevant to context for each point being made
4. Did not repeat the same catchphrases and pointless
intersections over and over.
For 96% of posters to this group, 99% of their posts would get
through (once they mastered the basic netiquette of snipping
for context!)
As for the other 4%, well, he'd have to learn how to post
properly or be forever silenced.
The Doctor wrote:
In article <vr1jjk$k3k$[email protected]>,
Usenet Big-8 Management Board <[email protected]> wrote:
Please be advised that in news.groups.proposals there is an
ongoing Request for Discussion (RFD) to remove 99 moderated
newsgroups, including the following one(s) that may be of
interest to readers of this notice:
rec.arts.drwho.moderated
These groups have long been derelict due to the lack of a
moderator.
If any readers of this notice are willing to serve as
moderator for any of these groups, and have the technical
infrastructure to do so, they are encouraged to contact the
Big-8 Management Board by replying by e-mail to this
message. The Board is happy to advise prospective
moderators on the technical and procedural requirements.
let it go!
Phew! I'm glad you said that Dave... when I saw that message
from the Big-8 Board I thought you might be the one person here
that would volunteer to become the moderator of RADWM! (Again!)
No vote would have been needed this time though... ;-)
My view is moderated groups equal censorship and go against the
whole idea behind Usenet... so yeah, let it go.
On 15/03/2025 8:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:^^^^^<-paedophile talker noted
The Doctor wrote:
In article <vr1jjk$k3k$[email protected]>, Usenet Big-8
Management Board <[email protected]> wrote:
Please be advised that in news.groups.proposals there is an
ongoing Request for Discussion (RFD) to remove 99 moderated
newsgroups, including the following one(s) that may be of
interest to readers of this notice:
rec.arts.drwho.moderated
These groups have long been derelict due to the lack of a
moderator.
If any readers of this notice are willing to serve as moderator
for any of these groups, and have the technical infrastructure to
do so, they are encouraged to contact the Big-8 Management Board
by replying by e-mail to this message. The Board is happy to
advise prospective moderators on the technical and procedural
requirements.
let it go!
Phew! I'm glad you said that Dave... when I saw that message from the
Big-8 Board I thought you might be the one person here that would
volunteer to become the moderator of RADWM!
I was EXPECTING Binky to stick his hand up .... but, maybe, his High
Powered ISP/NSP Business is keeping him too busy!!
Oh!! WAIT!!
(Again!) No vote would have been needed this time though... ;-)Never having been exposed to one, I couldn't possibly comment!! ;-P
My view is moderated groups equal censorship and go against the whole
idea behind Usenet... so yeah, let it go.
--
Daniel70
Daniel70 wrote:^^^^^<-paedophile talker noted
On 15/03/2025 8:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <vr1jjk$k3k$[email protected]>, Usenet Big-8
Management Board <[email protected]> wrote:
rec.arts.drwho.moderated
These groups have long been derelict due to the lack of
a moderator.
If any readers of this notice are willing to serve as
moderator for any of these groups, and have the
technical infrastructure to do so, they are encouraged
to contact the Big-8 Management Board by replying by
e-mail to this message. The Board is happy to advise
prospective moderators on the technical and procedural
requirements.
let it go!
Phew! I'm glad you said that Dave... when I saw that message
from the Big-8 Board I thought you might be the one person
here that would volunteer to become the moderator of RADWM!
I was EXPECTING Binky to stick his hand up .... but, maybe,
his High Powered ISP/NSP Business is keeping him too busy!!
I really did think it would be something Dave might go for. He
probably has the right equipment too. Dave did go for the
moderator job when that group was first announced to counter all
the "noise" (word of the week!) here.
RADW isn't busy enough now though so we don't need a moderated
group. (IMO obviously.)
My view is moderated groups equal censorship and go againstNever having been exposed to one, I couldn't possibly
the whole idea behind Usenet... so yeah, let it go.
comment!! ;-P
Imagine somebody reading every one of your posts and deciding
what was acceptable content, or not, before letting it go
through to the actual group to be read? I'm sure moderation
works well on some Usenet groups but moderation as a system is
open to abuse as you are at the whim of the moderator(s) and
their individual opinions and tolerances. Moderation is another
word for censorship, as if the moderator doesn't like what you
say, your post gets stopped and doesn't 'appear'. So, censored!
On 15/03/2025 10:37, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 15/03/2025 8:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <vr1jjk$k3k$[email protected]>, Usenet Big-8
Management Board <[email protected]> wrote:
rec.arts.drwho.moderated
These groups have long been derelict due to the lack of
a moderator.
If any readers of this notice are willing to serve as
moderator for any of these groups, and have the
technical infrastructure to do so, they are encouraged
to contact the Big-8 Management Board by replying by
e-mail to this message. The Board is happy to advise
prospective moderators on the technical and procedural
requirements.
let it go!
Phew! I'm glad you said that Dave... when I saw that message
from the Big-8 Board I thought you might be the one person
here that would volunteer to become the moderator of RADWM!
I was EXPECTING Binky to stick his hand up .... but, maybe,
his High Powered ISP/NSP Business is keeping him too busy!!
I really did think it would be something Dave might go for. He
probably has the right equipment too. Dave did go for the
moderator job when that group was first announced to counter all
the "noise" (word of the week!) here.
RADW isn't busy enough now though so we don't need a moderated
group. (IMO obviously.)
My view is moderated groups equal censorship and go againstNever having been exposed to one, I couldn't possibly
the whole idea behind Usenet... so yeah, let it go.
comment!! ;-P
Imagine somebody reading every one of your posts and deciding
what was acceptable content, or not, before letting it go
through to the actual group to be read? I'm sure moderation
works well on some Usenet groups but moderation as a system is
open to abuse as you are at the whim of the moderator(s) and
their individual opinions and tolerances. Moderation is another
word for censorship, as if the moderator doesn't like what you
say, your post gets stopped and doesn't 'appear'. So, censored!
Oh, I think a little technical moderation can be a good thing.
Imagine if this newsgroup permitted all messages that:
1. Contained 10 or more words of original content (A/I generated text,and
large scale copy/pasting from other sources not permitted - a link, with personal commentary, would be the right way to go here)
2. Did not personally defame or attack another poster
3. Snipped replied-to content to a couple of sentences relevant to context
for each point being made
4. Did not repeat the same catchphrases and pointless intersections over and
over.
For 96% of posters to this group, 99% of their posts would get through (once
they mastered the basic netiquette of snipping for context!)
As for the other 4%, well, he'd have to learn how to post properly or be
forever silenced.
--
There’s no point in being grown up if you can’t act a little childish
sometimes.
[SNIP]
[SNIP]
3. Snipped replied-to content to a couple of sentences relevant to context
for each point being made
Whoops, my last post just failed moderation;)
--
There’s no point in being grown up if you can’t act a little childish
sometimes.
The Last Doctor wrote:
Oh, I think a little technical moderation can be a good thing.
Imagine if this newsgroup permitted all messages that:
1. Contained 10 or more words of original content (A/I
generated text,and large scale copy/pasting from other sources
not permitted - a link, with personal commentary, would be the
right way to go here)
2. Did not personally defame or attack another poster
3. Snipped replied-to content to a couple of sentences
relevant to context for each point being made
4. Did not repeat the same catchphrases and pointless
intersections over and over.
For 96% of posters to this group, 99% of their posts would get
through (once they mastered the basic netiquette of snipping
for context!)
As for the other 4%, well, he'd have to learn how to post
properly or be forever silenced.
It would depend on who the actual moderator was though...
Imagine if Mr Yadallee was the moderator of a revamped RADWM?
RADWM would become an unchallenged Bible scripture newsgroup,
with some Doctor Who thrown in on eight Saturday evenings a
year... ;-)
Mickmane would probably do a good job though, but poor Dave
would get no messages through at all then! Oh hang on a mo...
The Last Doctor wrote:
For 96% of posters to this group, 99% of their posts would get
through (once they mastered the basic netiquette of snipping
for context!)
As for the other 4%, well, he'd have to learn how to post
properly or be forever silenced.
It would depend on who the actual moderator was though...
Imagine if Mr Yadallee was the moderator of a revamped RADWM?
RADWM would become an unchallenged Bible scripture newsgroup,
with some Doctor Who thrown in on eight Saturday evenings a
year... ;-)
Mickmane would probably do a good job though, but poor Dave
would get no messages through at all then! Oh hang on a mo...
Mickmane would probably do a good job though, but poor Dave
would get no messages through at all then! Oh hang on a mo...
On 16.03.25, Blueshirt <[email protected]> wrote:
[possible Moderator]
Mickmane would probably do a good job though, but poor Dave
would get no messages through at all then! Oh hang on a mo...
Lol. I think I'd have to read everything to decide what to send through.
I've got far better things to do. :P
--
Mickmane
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 14:08:56 |
| Calls: | 12,101 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 15,004 |
| Messages: | 6,518,022 |