Moderated Newsgroup?

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 09:33:25 GMT, (Rich McMahon)
wrote:

Mij

In short No it isnt possible to moderate a newsgroup. Its basically up
to the reader of the group if they want to participate in a discussion
or even read the post.


This is not true. Usenet groups can be moderated. It works in the
form of a moderator(s) get the post in form of email and then approve
or disapprove the post. The problem with this is it can sometimes
take days to get your message posted because of human intervention.
People go on vacation, get sick, etc.

Take for example rec.guns.

Mij Adyaw wrote:

Is it possible for this group to be moderated to eliminate the posts from
the trolls and loons?

It is possible. usenet has moderated groups. A proposal can be
submitted, moderators can be selected, a vote can be held, and (if
successful) voila - a moderated group. That can all take many momths of
concerted effort by numerous voluteers. Then comes the effort to get all
the news:// sources in the world to convert the group to moderated,
which in practice never happens. More practical is to propose a new
s.a.a.moderated group; this is also rife with problems.

The best, and fully practical, solution is
1) self moderation
2) killfile/ignore off-topic posts

Go to Astromart.com...Their forums are quickly becoming what SAA used
to be. Herb has said on a few occasion that he will not let his forums
become what SAA is now.

Astromart is nice and friendly but lacking posters of the level of Roland
Christen, Thomas Back, Rod Mollise, David Knisely (I hope I got that right) and
many others.

There are lots of dubious statements made on Astromart forums that just slide
by without a serious challenge because no one really knows the real answer.

I like Astromart and I like Herb, but until you get people posting with the
knowledge of Roland or Rod they are minor league.

Jon

"Jon Isaacs" wrote in message
...
Go to Astromart.com...Their forums are quickly becoming what SAA used
to be. Herb has said on a few occasion that he will not let his forums
become what SAA is now.

Astromart is nice and friendly but lacking posters of the level of Roland
Christen, Thomas Back, Rod Mollise, David Knisely (I hope I got that
right) and
many others.

There are lots of dubious statements made on Astromart forums that just
slide
by without a serious challenge because no one really knows the real
answer.

I like Astromart and I like Herb, but until you get people posting with
the
knowledge of Roland or Rod they are minor league.

Jon


Rod posts there sometime but he's quite the busy guy so...what we need to do
is....clone him. ;^)

Best regards,
Bill

"Trane Francks" wrote in message
...
On 09/19/03 16:40 +0900, Mij Adyaw wrote:

Is it possible for this group to be moderated to eliminate the posts
from
the trolls and loons? Is it asking too much to keep this group on the
topic

Usenet newsgroups are self-moderated. Some folks have trouble
with that.

There are moderated newsgroups, such as comp.dcom.telecom. But someone has
to be willing to be the moderator -- an unpaid and time-consuming job.

Many serious astronomy groups, some of them moderated, are on
yahoogroups.com (not Usenet).

"Bill Becker" wrote in message
...

Rod posts there sometime but he's quite the busy guy so...what we need to
do
is....clone him. ;^)

There's a scary thought. We'd need a new plant to make more Rebel Yell!

;-)

Chuck Taylor
Do you observe the moon?
Try the Lunar Observing Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/

"Mij Adyaw" wrote in message news:_pyab.64111$nf3.27315@fed1read07...
Is it possible for this group to be moderated to eliminate the posts from
the trolls and loons? Is it asking too much to keep this group on the topic
of amateur astronomy? I am tired to thousands of posts from trolls and even
more inexcusable are the rants and foul language from participants that
sometimes provide helpful on-topic information. If the topic is not
related to astronomy, equipment, observing, imaging, etc, it does not belong
here. It is that simple. What is so difficult about that concept?

This sort of appeal for everybody to be good, nice and on-topic is
simply a non-starter IMO. The perfect moderator is the "idiot" reading
the posts. Do I come round and hold a gun to your head to force you to
read every post? No? Then who (but yourself) is forcing you to read
what you don't like? This is humanity at play. Without much restraint
except self-restraint. Try showing some yourself.

If you really want to increase the on-topic percentage then post
on-topic yourself. It's really as simple as that. Who reads Min anyway
except newbies to the newsgroups these days? I don't even bother to
read his complete thread titles the moment I recognise his "style".

BTW: Serious (life-career) "rule makers" are usually into religion.
It's called "control" and populated by "control freaks". Strangely
they are the first to break the rules that they most fervently desire
others to follow. Religious freak anti-abortionists killing doctors,
for example. Roman catholic priests raping choirboys. The Taliban,
Iran, Sects. There's communist leaders with palaces in the woods by
the sea. Political leaders wih claimed deep religious faith who start
wars. The list is probably endless.

Keep this firmly in mind next time you start a thread. According to
your own rules: Your post (and the subsequent thread) are seriously
off-topic. It certainly is by my rules and I'm breaking those same
rules by responding.

Chris.B
Loon or troll?
By your rules or mine?

Take for example rec.guns.

Take rec.mywife.... please!