sci.space.tech moderation under new management

This post is to let you know that sci.space.tech is now being moderated
again. Moderation of sci.space.science will soon follow.

George Herbert has graciously passed the reins on to the new moderators so
that perhaps these newsgroups can have some life again.

The moderators a

Greg Moore (mooregr (at) greenms.com)
Derek Lyons (fairwater (at) gmail.com)
Mary Shafer reunite.gondwana (at) gmail.com

Some of you may be wondering why us. The honest answer is simple: because
we undertook the work to make this happen. Derek and I discussed at length
what we thought it would take to try to bring back these newsgroups from the
dead. Among the issues we discussed was making sure we had an odd number of
moderators so we decided to look for a third. We hoped to find someone
whose integrity and experience would be above reproach. Graciously and
fortunately Mary Shafer has agreed to be that person.

We are still in the early stages of getting details worked out. In fact we
are finalizing the setup of the approval software. We want to thank Paul W.
Schleck for his unselfish help in setting up the account and getting the
software working.

As for posting guidelines, we are working on those but in general we will be
trying to use the standards outlined below.

Posts will initially be judged on content. NO posters will initially be
blacklisted. However, posters who continually post and repost rejected
material may find themselves eventually blacklisted.

For sci.space.tech, any post should have a majority of the content be of a
technical nature.
There is room for non-technical details, but if the moderators feel the post
is to far from technical we are likely to ask for a rewrite. A post that is
obviously non-technical in nature or completely off-topic will be rejected
outright.

Posts that include cites, equations and proven science and technology
references are preferred. If you want to discuss esoteric subjects such as
FTL, anti-gravity and other non-proven scientific principles, please make
sure to have recent and citable references for the topic. Pie in the sky
posts will generally be rejected.

Personal attacks generally will NOT be tolerated. Quips at others expense
or ribbing may be tolerated as long as they are not the main point of the
post and are specific to the points being addressed.

Topics that we feel have run their course will generally be closed off until
new technical information is posted. Rehashing topics over and over again
will not be permitted.


As moderators we realize that we can probably please all the people some of
the time and some of the people all the time, but will never please all the
people all of the time. So be it.

If you have issues with how we are moderating or an issue with why specific
posts were or were not approved, we will consider all reasonably written
emails to us. Part of the reason for an odd-number of moderators is so that
if necessary, we can vote on any posts that require that.

Please keep in mind the three of us are all volunteers and spending out
time, effort and to an extent money to make this happen.

Thank you

Your sci.space.tech moderation team.

Greg Moore
Derek Lyons
Mary Shafer

--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote in message
m...


This post is to let you know that sci.space.tech is now being moderated
again. Moderation of sci.space.science will soon follow.

George Herbert has graciously passed the reins on to the new moderators so
that perhaps these newsgroups can have some life again.

The moderators a

Greg Moore (mooregr (at) greenms.com)
Derek Lyons (fairwater (at) gmail.com)
Mary Shafer reunite.gondwana (at) gmail.com

Cool. :-)

Jeff
--
"Many things that were acceptable in 1958 are no longer acceptable today.
My own standards have changed too." -- Freeman Dyson

"JF Mezei" wrote in message
...
Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:

Posts will initially be judged on content. NO posters will initially be
blacklisted.


Ask your third moderator if she has still me as blacklisted and urging
her friends to discredit me at every opportunity no matter the content
of my messages.

You can rest assured that I won't try to participate so you won't have
to worry about me.

Have you ever contributed anything original that would meet the posting
requirements of sci.space.tech? Feel free to provide a link to what you can
find in Google Groups. I personally don't want to attempt to look for that
needle in a haystack.

Jeff
--
"Many things that were acceptable in 1958 are no longer acceptable today.
My own standards have changed too." -- Freeman Dyson

On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:40:34 -0400, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:

This post is to let you know that sci.space.tech is now being moderated
again. Moderation of sci.space.science will soon follow.

The moderators a

Greg Moore (mooregr (at) greenms.com)
Derek Lyons (fairwater (at) gmail.com)
Mary Shafer reunite.gondwana (at) gmail.com

Thanks, folks!

Brian

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote in message
m...


This post is to let you know that sci.space.tech is now being moderated
again. Moderation of sci.space.science will soon follow.

George Herbert has graciously passed the reins on to the new moderators so
that perhaps these newsgroups can have some life again.

"graciously"??? No posts have been getting through to that group, or the
other moderated sci.space groups for years! That's the problem with
moderation; it requires humans to do the work and they lose interest at a
fantastic rate.

"Alan Erskine" wrote in message
...
"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote in
message m...


This post is to let you know that sci.space.tech is now being moderated
again. Moderation of sci.space.science will soon follow.

George Herbert has graciously passed the reins on to the new moderators
so that perhaps these newsgroups can have some life again.

"graciously"??? No posts have been getting through to that group, or the
other moderated sci.space groups for years! That's the problem with
moderation; it requires humans to do the work and they lose interest at a
fantastic rate.

Which often times happens when you're doing a lot of work for no pay.
Furthermore, moderation of a Usenet group is a thankless job. Often times
the only feedback is negative and is often caused by the lag in time between
posting a new message and its approval and appearance in the newsgroup.
Moderators do have lives outside of Usenet and posting lags will happen.

This isn't Twitter. If you want Twitter, get off Usenet.

Jeff
--
"Many things that were acceptable in 1958 are no longer acceptable today.
My own standards have changed too." -- Freeman Dyson