allen@sulaco.UUCP (Allen Gwinn) (10/24/88)
I would like to propose that instead of changing news.admin to moderated, we create a moderated forum to complement news.admin. The "noise" could be filtered out by a moderator, the result posted to the group. Those that didn't wish to wade through the stuff in news.admin could read the edited version in the moderated forum. One of the major concerns with a totally moderated forum (Elliot doesn't seem to agree) is that moderation would lead to a biased forum. This proposal would virtually eliminate this concern as people would have the option of reading the raw input themselves rather than be forced to read an edited version of whats posted. This would also solve the problem on turn-around time, as there would always be a "standard" newsgroup that anyone could post to. Please post comments on this (or email them to me). -- Allen Gwinn ...sulaco!allen Disclaimer: The facts stated are my own. "If you're not a liberal at 20, you have not heart, and if you're not a conservative at 40, you have no head" --Winston Churchill
emv@a.cc.umich.edu (Ed Vielmetti) (10/24/88)
In article <315@sulaco.UUCP> allen@sulaco.UUCP (Allen Gwinn) writes: >I would like to propose that instead of changing news.admin to moderated, >we create a moderated forum to complement news.admin. how about news.admin.funny ? it worked for the jokes. --Ed
" Maynard) (10/25/88)
In article <1309@mailgw.cc.umich.edu> emv@mailgw.cc.umich.edu (Ed Vielmetti) writes: >In article <315@sulaco.UUCP> allen@sulaco.UUCP (Allen Gwinn) writes: >>I would like to propose that instead of changing news.admin to moderated, >>we create a moderated forum to complement news.admin. >how about news.admin.funny ? it worked for the jokes. Only if we get Brad Templeton to moderate. After all, he's doing an unimaginably fantastic job with rec.humor.funny... -- Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can uucp: uunet!nuchat! (eieio)| adequately be explained by stupidity. hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!splut!jay +---------------------------------------- {killer,bellcore}!tness1! | "Dukakis" is just Greek for "Mondale".
rja@edison.GE.COM (rja) (10/25/88)
In article <315@sulaco.UUCP>, allen@sulaco.UUCP (Allen Gwinn) writes: > I would like to propose that instead of changing news.admin to moderated, > we create a moderated forum to complement news.admin. Not necessary. Use News.misc which will cover all other cases. The priority should be on cleaning up this forum so that the news admins and other relevant people will be able to read without the excess noise which tends to make people not read the newsgroup at all as it is. The idea that a moderator is A Bad Thing is a kind of 'red herring' and doesn't hold much merit for a group like news.admin. Please followup to news.groups where this has been cross-posted. That is where this kind of discussion belongs. ______________________________________________________________________________ rja@edison.GE.COM or ...uunet!virginia!edison!rja via Internet (preferable) via uucp (if you must) ______________________________________________________________________________
bamst3@cisunx.UUCP (Brian A. Mermon) (10/27/88)
In article <1309@mailgw.cc.umich.edu> emv@mailgw.cc.umich.edu (Ed Vielmetti) writes: In article <315@sulaco.UUCP> allen@sulaco.UUCP (Allen Gwinn) writes: >I would like to propose that instead of changing news.admin to moderated, >we create a moderated forum to complement news.admin. >how about news.admin.funny ? it worked for the jokes. Yea, ED, that's a good idea! Since you don't have to go thru the normal channels, why don't you just create it. Brian
lear@NET.BIO.NET (Eliot Lear) (10/27/88)
In article <315@sulaco.UUCP> Allen Gwinn suggests a moderated newsgroup to complement news.admin. I'm all for this in the short term, but in the long term, I think we need moderation as a replacement. > One of the major concerns with a totally moderated forum (Elliot doesn't > seem to agree) is that moderation would lead to a biased forum. I don't like to think of myself as having biases, but I suppose everyone has them. Most of the people who listed reasons for their objections simply complained about the lack of timeliness. I *do* object to your spelling of my name, however (1/2 ;-). -- Eliot Lear [lear@net.bio.net]