Make this group Moderated?

only if you don't use good control

All true, but I still don't want a moderator.

DerbyDad03 wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@nntp.aioe.org:

Yes, exactly. And this thread is a good example of subject "drift".

We live in a world of almost instantaneous communications. Why should an inquiry wait until a moderator deigns to post it and wait still longer while the moderator decides if responses are on topic? The U.S. put men on the moon with less computing capacity than a teenager carries in his pocket.

You described it perfectly. What you have is some folks who just don't get the concept that there are others besides themselves.

This is the same as for example a neighbor who decides to use air tools at 3 AM. Since they know they are the only one that matters they just do it. A normal person knows that life is a give and take thing and you can't have it your way all of the time.

If you were to mention "say Bob its 3 AM and everyone else is sleeping" just like here you would be told it is your problem.

Yes, exactly. And this thread is a good example of subject "drift".

Of course he does. He's said it.

That's *NOT* what he said. Moderating a group isn't about a "bit" more focused. ...but you too are welcome to find a net group that fits your likes better.

No, it's netcops and whiners (see: mirror).

...and you're forced to read it, right? Oh, the horrors!

...and you're forced to read them all, right? That's just un-American!

Why don't you find a moderated group that fits your tastes better than trying to tell everyone else what to do? Of course, you don't believe in personal responsibility. Got it.

as moderated?  Has anyone ever

Moderation does not have to work in that manner. I am not advocating moderation of any usenet group...simply pointing out the error of the assumption you seem to have made.

Moderation can be an "after-the-fact" process.

I am one of several moderators of an on-line help forum for a specific software application. All posts appear in the forum as soon as they are posted. It is my responsibility to log in every now and then and review the posts. I then have a number of options, including:

My point here is simply to show that moderation does not have to mean a delay in posts appearing in the group. The moderation involves the decision as to whether or not the posts (or thread) *stays* in the group.

If I go on vacation or if my PC is down or if I just don't give a crap on a given day everything that is sent to the forum shows up in the forum. Since all moderators can moderate any forum on the site, I will often let them (or the site administrator) know that I won't be available for a few days. If they choose to keep an eye on "my" forum, that's fine. If not, I can look it over when I get back.

Please see my response to D. Hoffman on how moderation can occur without any impact by making it an "after the fact" process.

Sure, moderation can be set up such that posts are checked prior to appearing in the forum/group but more often it is handled by deleting the posts after they appear.

With that process, there is no delay in the appearance of the posts. It then becomes a matter of whether or not the moderator feels that the post is appropriate and whether or not it should be edited or deleted.

Are you aware of any Usenet groups that work on that model? I don't believe that the distributed nature of Usenet allows for that to work. Once something is posted, even the originator is not guaranteed to be able to cancel it.

You can have multiple moderators. If it's a moderated group you want, go to a moderated group. It really is that simple.

NEVER!!

A forum/newsgroup with a moderator is a forum/newsgroup with a dictator and freedom of speech is the victim.

I recently joined a forum and was quite happy, initially. Then it began. The first incident was when some female moderator misconstrued my post as a personal attack on all women and I was chastised publicy for being a mysoginist. The slight was totally imagined, but she lashed out publicly with her fantasy and I was quite embarrassed.

Next, I discovered not everyone is altruistic and honest (I'm such a romantic). When I pointed this out and offered some advice on how to guard against this possibility, I was censured. My post was deleted with nary an explanation, despite my overall tone being one of aid and help.

It happened once again, when the forum rewrote the rules and one rule was so ambiguous and confusing, most everyone complained. Later, it was discovered all post that were not essentially in agreement with the general drone stroke-fest were deleted, mine included. Apparently constructive criticism is not wanted in that particular forum.

NOPE! NO MODERATORS!!

I don't give a flying flop if yer a long winded moronic dolt who is merely trolling for turkeys, I know how to KF you. At least I can reply in kind if I'm feeling particularly peevish, and without fear of censure or repercussions. Likewise, you are free to ignore or KF me. Simple, eh?

nb

DerbyDad03 wrote in news:3efda7cc-5209-4203-ab0c- snipped-for-privacy@c15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com:

In a web forum, yes. Usenet does not work that way.

Ummm.... no, it's not.

Unlike neighbors, that have made great efforts/commitments, perhaps lifelong, to be where they now are, you need not be here, at all, and it is by YOUR choice that you are here. If you don't like it, leave. It's as easy and painless as pushing a keyboard button and the only investment is yer ego.

nb

Over in talk.origins (moderated) it seems to work that way. The moderator warns people, then bans them.

I believe he does this with an automatic filter followed up with manual action. So he doesn't have to read every post, his scripts do.

Same with rec.guns, which is why so many ppl post gun talk to other groups. Freedom and guns. Almost can't have one without the other.

nb

And you can block out the idiot without also blocking the people you want to listen to. (Think of it as noise cancelling the neighbor at 0300 without cutting off the entire neighborhood).

Good point...once it post gets propagated, it would be kind of hard to pull it back.

Nevermind!

DerbyDad03 wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@c7g2000vbe.googlegroups.com:

Better IMO to warn the poster that he is violating posting rules and then black-ball the poster if he doesn't get his act together.