On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 9:58:25 AM UTC-8, Herman wrote:
>
> RMCR hasn't got a chance.

Moderate, moderate, moderate.

dk

On Wednesday, March 8, 2023 at 9:31:27 PM UTC-8, Dan Koren wrote:
> On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 10:27:04 PM UTC-8, Herman wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 7, 2023 at 5:05:54 AM UTC+1, Andy Evans wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 7 March 2023 at 03:47:29 UTC, Dan Koren wrote:
> > >
> > > > > But this endless name calling has gone on for months and
> > > > > I just want to make it perfectly clear that it needs to stop.
> > > > > It's not acceptable and I won't accept it. Enough.
> > > > Then why do you object to having the group moderated?
> > >
> > > I never said anything one way or the other about the group being moderated.
> > >
> > > Moderate yourself and the question won't arise.
> >
> > These DK questions are 100% disingenuous.
> > He knows RMCR is per definition unmoderated,
> There is no "definition" that makes RMCR
> unmoderated or unmoderable. Why don't
> you stop spreading nonsense and hate?
> > so it'll never happen.
> It can happen as soon as we draft a
> plan and take a vote. This isn't rocket
> science.
>
> dk

Does rmcr need a moderator or THIS?:

https://giphy.com/clips/puppybowl-puppy-bowl-xviii-18-dw0CzCA2UB2CvkO24O

On Wednesday, March 8, 2023 at 9:31:27 PM UTC-8, Dan Koren wrote:
> On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 10:27:04 PM UTC-8, Herman wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 7, 2023 at 5:05:54 AM UTC+1, Andy Evans wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 7 March 2023 at 03:47:29 UTC, Dan Koren wrote:
> > >
> > > > > But this endless name calling has gone on for months and
> > > > > I just want to make it perfectly clear that it needs to stop.
> > > > > It's not acceptable and I won't accept it. Enough.
> > > > Then why do you object to having the group moderated?
> > >
> > > I never said anything one way or the other about the group being moderated.
> > >
> > > Moderate yourself and the question won't arise.
> >
> > These DK questions are 100% disingenuous.
> > He knows RMCR is per definition unmoderated,
> There is no "definition" that makes RMCR
> unmoderated or unmoderable. Why don't
> you stop spreading nonsense and hate?
> > so it'll never happen.
> It can happen as soon as we draft a
> plan and take a vote. This isn't rocket
> science.
>
> dk

Does rmcr need a moderator or THIS?:

https://giphy.com/clips/puppybowl-puppy-bowl-xviii-18-dw0CzCA2UB2CvkO24O

On 2023-03-09 05:41:10 +0000, Dan Koren said:

> On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 9:58:25 AM UTC-8, Herman wrote:
>>
>> RMCR hasn't got a chance.
>
> Moderate, moderate, moderate.
>
> dk

Moderation will be the death of RMCR.

-Owen

On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 10:08:50 AM UTC-8, Owen Hartnett wrote:
> On 2023-03-09 05:41:10 +0000, Dan Koren said:
>
> > On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 9:58:25 AM UTC-8, Herman wrote:
> >>
> >> RMCR hasn't got a chance.
> >
> > Moderate, moderate, moderate.
>
> Moderation will be the death of RMCR.
>

Can you explain why and how?

TIA

On 2023-03-09 18:10:22 +0000, Dan Koren said:

> On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 10:08:50 AM UTC-8, Owen Hartnett wrote:
>> On 2023-03-09 05:41:10 +0000, Dan Koren said:>> > On Monday, March 6,
>> 2023 at 9:58:25 AM UTC-8, Herman wrote:> >>> >> RMCR hasn't got a
>> chance.> >> > Moderate, moderate, moderate.>
>> Moderation will be the death of RMCR.>
> Can you explain why and how?
>
> TIA

Because:

1) most of the posts currently made to the group would be excised by a
responsible moderator (including mine!)

2) Finding a capable and unbiased moderator would be difficult. It's a
thankless position, much like a baseball umpire, except there's no pay
(unless someone wants to finance it -- minimum wage laws may apply).

3) This group is still thriving, unlike much of usenet. Even spam
posts barely appear anymore. The daily traffic level is currently
good. Less posts == less things to talk about.

4) Use of a killfile is better and more effective.

-Owen

On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 1:07:49 PM UTC-8, Owen Hartnett wrote:
> On 2023-03-09 18:10:22 +0000, Dan Koren said:
>
> > On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 10:08:50 AM UTC-8, Owen Hartnett wrote:
> >> On 2023-03-09 05:41:10 +0000, Dan Koren said:>> > On Monday, March 6,
> >> 2023 at 9:58:25 AM UTC-8, Herman wrote:> >>> >> RMCR hasn't got a
> >> chance.> >> > Moderate, moderate, moderate.>
> >> Moderation will be the death of RMCR.>
> > Can you explain why and how?
> >
> > TIA
>
> Because:
>
> 1) most of the posts currently made to the
> group would be excised by a responsible
> moderator (including mine!)

It all depends on what rules we agree upon.

There can be multiple moderators. It would
be impractical, and in fact stupid, to have a
single moderator.

> 2) Finding a capable and unbiased moderator
> would be difficult. It's a thankless position,
> much like a baseball umpire, except there's
> no pay (unless someone wants to finance it
> -- minimum wage laws may apply).

Read above. Applying a well defined framework
is an almost mechanical task. Moderators apply
rules, they don't rely on personal bias. If in doubt,
send the article back to the author to rewrite. It
is really simple.

> 3) This group is still thriving, unlike much of
> usenet. Even spam posts barely appear anymore.
> The daily traffic level is currently good. Less posts
> == less things to talk about.

Please don't pull the Safeway act on us. "Fewer",
not "Less". Learn English. Otherwise, this last
comment is non sequitur.

> 4) Use of a killfile is better and more effective.

No, because killfiles apply to posters rather than
topics.

dk

Op donderdag 9 maart 2023 om 22:07:49 UTC+1 schreef Owen Hartnett:
> On 2023-03-09 18:10:22 +0000, Dan Koren said:
>
> > On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 10:08:50 AM UTC-8, Owen Hartnett wrote:
> >> On 2023-03-09 05:41:10 +0000, Dan Koren said:>> > On Monday, March 6,
> >> 2023 at 9:58:25 AM UTC-8, Herman wrote:> >>> >> RMCR hasn't got a
> >> chance.> >> > Moderate, moderate, moderate.>
> >> Moderation will be the death of RMCR.>
> > Can you explain why and how?
> >
> > TIA
> Because:
>
> 1) most of the posts currently made to the group would be excised by a
> responsible moderator (including mine!)
>
> 2) Finding a capable and unbiased moderator would be difficult. It's a
> thankless position, much like a baseball umpire, except there's no pay
> (unless someone wants to finance it -- minimum wage laws may apply).
>
> 3) This group is still thriving, unlike much of usenet. Even spam
> posts barely appear anymore. The daily traffic level is currently
> good. Less posts == less things to talk about.
>
> 4) Use of a killfile is better and more effective.

Excellent explanation!

Henk

Dan Koren a présenté l'énoncé suivant :
> No, because killfiles apply to posters rather than
> topics.

With *MESNEWS*, you can filter messages according to _any_ condition:

https://www.cjoint.com/c/MCkcxfIChPl

For example, filter all messages sent on April 4th 2021 by dk and
containing the word "jew"...

On Friday, 10 March 2023 at 13:26:47 UTC+11, MELMOTH wrote:
> Dan Koren a présenté l'énoncé suivant :
> > No, because killfiles apply to posters rather than
> > topics.
> With *MESNEWS*, you can filter messages according to _any_ condition:
>
> https://www.cjoint.com/c/MCkcxfIChPl
>
> For example, filter all messages sent on April 4th 2021 by dk and
> containing the word "jew"...

DK is a long way away from the record. For the record.

Ray Hall, Taree

On 2023-03-09 22:07:10 +0000, Dan Koren said:

> On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 1:07:49 PM UTC-8, Owen Hartnett wrote:
>> On 2023-03-09 18:10:22 +0000, Dan Koren said:>> > On Thursday, March 9,
>> 2023 at 10:08:50 AM UTC-8, Owen Hartnett wrote:> >> On 2023-03-09
>> 05:41:10 +0000, Dan Koren said:>> > On Monday, March 6,> >> 2023 at
>> 9:58:25 AM UTC-8, Herman wrote:> >>> >> RMCR hasn't got a> >> chance.>
>> >> > Moderate, moderate, moderate.>> >> Moderation will be the death of
>> RMCR.>> > Can you explain why and how?> >> > TIA
>>
>> Because:>> 1) most of the posts currently made to the> group would be
>> excised by a responsible> moderator (including mine!)
> It all depends on what rules we agree upon.

So we're suddenly all have to agree? You're stretching here. That
hasn't happened yet!

>
> There can be multiple moderators. It wouldbe impractical, and in fact
> stupid, to have a
> single moderator.

While I admit that many of the regulars here are surrounding retirement
age, I doubt that we could field a reliable crew who wish to spend any
part of their lives at this point, editing and fighting with posters
whose posts didn't make the grade.
>
>> 2) Finding a capable and unbiased moderator> would be difficult. It's a
>> thankless position,> much like a baseball umpire, except there's> no
>> pay (unless someone wants to finance it> -- minimum wage laws may
>> apply).
> Read above. Applying a well defined frameworkis an almost mechanical
> task. Moderators applyrules, they don't rely on personal bias. If in
> doubt,send the article back to the author to rewrite. Itis really
> simple.

Rules without ambiguity? Maybe ChatGPT could moderate us? Perhaps you
should spin off a test moderated group, and see how well you fare?

>> 3) This group is still thriving, unlike much of> usenet. Even spam
>> posts barely appear anymore.> The daily traffic level is currently
>> good. Less posts> == less things to talk about.
> Please don't pull the Safeway act on us. "Fewer",
> not "Less". Learn English. Otherwise, this lastcomment is non sequitur.

The most wonderful thing about grammar/usage-shaming is that they
almost invariably make some mistake in their own post. There is no
such word as "lastcomment," but there is a "last comment."

Regardless, (I almost wrote irregardless, just for fun), moderation
can only result in fewer posts. People can get discouraged and just go
away if they hate the moderator du jour.

I love the anarchic, wild west internet. We see (read?) people at
their full colors, immoderate (note nifty pun!), and free of filters.

A quote from Matt Taibbi about an unrelated manner:
"The original promise of the Internet was that it might democratize the
exchange of information globally. A free internet would overwhelm all
attempts to control information flow, its very existence a threat to
anti-democratic forms of government everywhere."
>
>> 4) Use of a killfile is better and more effective.
> No, because killfiles apply to posters rather thantopics.

With all the topic creep we have here? (including this post!)

Any "rule" involving topics would tend to be ambiguous. The reader is
invited to create examples.

-Owen

On Saturday, 11 March 2023 at 03:29:09 UTC+11, Owen Hartnett wrote:
> On 2023-03-09 22:07:10 +0000, Dan Koren said:
>
> > On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 1:07:49 PM UTC-8, Owen Hartnett wrote:
> >> On 2023-03-09 18:10:22 +0000, Dan Koren said:>> > On Thursday, March 9,
> >> 2023 at 10:08:50 AM UTC-8, Owen Hartnett wrote:> >> On 2023-03-09
> >> 05:41:10 +0000, Dan Koren said:>> > On Monday, March 6,> >> 2023 at
> >> 9:58:25 AM UTC-8, Herman wrote:> >>> >> RMCR hasn't got a> >> chance.>
> >> >> > Moderate, moderate, moderate.>> >> Moderation will be the death of
> >> RMCR.>> > Can you explain why and how?> >> > TIA
> >>
> >> Because:>> 1) most of the posts currently made to the> group would be
> >> excised by a responsible> moderator (including mine!)
> > It all depends on what rules we agree upon.
> So we're suddenly all have to agree? You're stretching here. That
> hasn't happened yet!
>
> >
> > There can be multiple moderators. It wouldbe impractical, and in fact
> > stupid, to have a
> > single moderator.
> While I admit that many of the regulars here are surrounding retirement
> age, I doubt that we could field a reliable crew who wish to spend any
> part of their lives at this point, editing and fighting with posters
> whose posts didn't make the grade.
> >
> >> 2) Finding a capable and unbiased moderator> would be difficult. It's a
> >> thankless position,> much like a baseball umpire, except there's> no
> >> pay (unless someone wants to finance it> -- minimum wage laws may
> >> apply).
> > Read above. Applying a well defined frameworkis an almost mechanical
> > task. Moderators applyrules, they don't rely on personal bias. If in
> > doubt,send the article back to the author to rewrite. Itis really
> > simple.
>
> Rules without ambiguity? Maybe ChatGPT could moderate us? Perhaps you
> should spin off a test moderated group, and see how well you fare?
> >> 3) This group is still thriving, unlike much of> usenet. Even spam
> >> posts barely appear anymore.> The daily traffic level is currently
> >> good. Less posts> == less things to talk about.
> > Please don't pull the Safeway act on us. "Fewer",
> > not "Less". Learn English. Otherwise, this lastcomment is non sequitur.
> The most wonderful thing about grammar/usage-shaming is that they
> almost invariably make some mistake in their own post. There is no
> such word as "lastcomment," but there is a "last comment."
>
> Regardless, (I almost wrote irregardless, just for fun), moderation
> can only result in fewer posts. People can get discouraged and just go
> away if they hate the moderator du jour.
>
> I love the anarchic, wild west internet. We see (read?) people at
> their full colors, immoderate (note nifty pun!), and free of filters.
>
> A quote from Matt Taibbi about an unrelated manner:
> "The original promise of the Internet was that it might democratize the
> exchange of information globally. A free internet would overwhelm all
> attempts to control information flow, its very existence a threat to
> anti-democratic forms of government everywhere."
> >
> >> 4) Use of a killfile is better and more effective.
> > No, because killfiles apply to posters rather thantopics.
> With all the topic creep we have here? (including this post!)
>
> Any "rule" involving topics would tend to be ambiguous. The reader is
> invited to create examples.
>
> -Owen

Moderation of a social group is akin to death of the group. A ludicrous idea.

Ray Hall, Taree

On Friday, March 10, 2023 at 8:29:09 AM UTC-8, Owen Hartnett wrote:
> On 2023-03-09 22:07:10 +0000, Dan Koren said:
>
> > On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 1:07:49 PM UTC-8, Owen Hartnett wrote:
> >> On 2023-03-09 18:10:22 +0000, Dan Koren said:>> > On Thursday, March 9,
> >> 2023 at 10:08:50 AM UTC-8, Owen Hartnett wrote:> >> On 2023-03-09
> >> 05:41:10 +0000, Dan Koren said:>> > On Monday, March 6,> >> 2023 at
> >> 9:58:25 AM UTC-8, Herman wrote:> >>> >> RMCR hasn't got a> >> chance.>
> >> >> > Moderate, moderate, moderate.>> >> Moderation will be the death of
> >> RMCR.>> > Can you explain why and how?> >> > TIA
> >>
> >> Because:>> 1) most of the posts currently made to the> group would be
> >> excised by a responsible> moderator (including mine!)
> >
> > It all depends on what rules we agree upon.
>
> So we're suddenly all have to agree? You're
> stretching here. That hasn't happened yet!

We do not have to ALL agree. Just a sufficient
number to vote in the groups's charter. Do you
remember how elections work?

> > There can be multiple moderators. It would
> > be impractical, and in fact stupid, to have a
> > single moderator.
>
> While I admit that many of the regulars here are
> surrounding retirement age, I doubt that we could
> field a reliable crew who wish to spend any part of
> their lives at this point, editing and fighting with
> posters whose posts didn't make the grade.

Why don't you speak for just yourself? There are
probably a few people in this ng who would be
delighted to volunteer to moderate the group.
Just off the top of my head, Melmoth, Marc,
Herman, Oscar and Gerard would find this a
great opportunity to impose their views on
others! ;-)
> >> 2) Finding a capable and unbiased moderator
> >> would be difficult. It's a thankless position,
> >> much like a baseball umpire, except there's
> >> no pay (unless someone wants to finance it
> >> -- minimum wage laws may apply).
>
> > Read above. Applying a well defined frameworkis an
> > almost mechanical task. Moderators apply rules, they
> > don't rely on personal bias. If in doubt, send the article
> > back to the author to rewrite. It is really simple.
>
> Rules without ambiguity? Maybe ChatGPT could

Can you point out the "ambiguity" in "no political
topics"? Your are either playing dumb, or you are
dumb.

> moderate us? Perhaps you should spin off a test
> moderated group, and see how well you fare?

There are already plenty of moderated groups
that work pretty well, both within the general
internet framewok or on sites such as Reddit
or Discord.

> >> 3) This group is still thriving, unlike much of
> >> usenet. Even spam posts barely appear anymore.
> >> The daily traffic level is currently good. Less posts
> >> == less things to talk about.
> >
> > Please don't pull the Safeway act on us. "Fewer",
> > not "Less". Learn English. Otherwise, this lastcomment is non sequitur.
> The most wonderful thing about grammar/usage-shaming is that they
> almost invariably make some mistake in their own post. There is no
> such word as "lastcomment," but there is a "last comment."
>
> Regardless, (I almost wrote irregardless, just for fun),
> moderation can only result in fewer posts. People can
> get discouraged and just go away if they hate the
> moderator du jour.
>
> I love the anarchic, wild west internet. We see (read?)
> people at their full colors, immoderate (note nifty pun!),
> and free of filters.

If that's the case, don't complain when people post
articles you or others find offensive or insulting.

Have you ever been called a bigoted, retarded,
hyperconservative, ultrareactionary, brainfucked
imbecile? Now you have.

> A quote from Matt Taibbi about an unrelated manner:
> "The original promise of the Internet was that it might
> democratize the exchange of information globally. A
> free internet would overwhelm all attempts to control
> information flow, its very existence a threat to
> anti-democratic forms of government everywhere."

The converse is also equally true. A free internet also
provides the ability to flood the world with falsehood,
misinformation, hatred and prejudice.

> >> 4) Use of a killfile is better and more effective.
> > No, because killfiles apply to posters rather thantopics.
> With all the topic creep we have here? (including this post!)
>
> Any "rule" involving topics would tend to be ambiguous.
> The reader is invited to create examples.

Are you playing dumb again? What is "ambiguous"
about "no politics"? Or about "no marimbas"?

dk

On Friday, March 10, 2023 at 6:25:48 PM UTC-8, Dan Koren wrote:

> Have you ever been called a bigoted, retarded,
> hyperconservative, ultrareactionary, brainfucked
> imbecile? Now you have.

https://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/B0006IU7JK/ref=sr_1_1?gclid=Cj0KCQiAx6ugBhCcARIsAGNmMbjfLsZwjbzvwOfsWVNDFMJEsgRARXh99PUufKVJk12htJbfPVRt-2gaAoqdEALw_wcB&hvadid=267869286942&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=1013768&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=11938332450554334281&hvtargid=kwd-298652170742&hydadcr=22593_10348166&keywords=how-win-friends-influence-people&qid=1678506336&sr=8-1

On Friday, March 10, 2023 at 7:47:30 PM UTC-8, Paul Alsing wrote:
> On Friday, March 10, 2023 at 6:25:48 PM UTC-8, Dan Koren wrote:
>
> > Have you ever been called a bigoted, retarded,
> > hyperconservative, ultrareactionary, brainfucked
> > imbecile? Now you have.
>
> https://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/B0006IU7JK/

Thanks! That was only an example! ;-)
I am not trying to influence anyone.

dk

On Friday, March 10, 2023 at 6:00:06 PM UTC-8, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Moderation of a social group is akin to
> death of the group. A ludicrous idea.

Can you provide any real life examples?
How about Reddit or Discord? There
seem to be plenty of thriving groups
under their respective umbrellas that
do not appear at all to be dead.

dk

On Saturday, 11 March 2023 at 15:46:15 UTC+11, Dan Koren wrote:
> On Friday, March 10, 2023 at 6:00:06 PM UTC-8, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > Moderation of a social group is akin to
> > death of the group. A ludicrous idea.
> Can you provide any real life examples?
> How about Reddit or Discord? There
> seem to be plenty of thriving groups
> under their respective umbrellas that
> do not appear at all to be dead.
>
> dk

I do not know about Reddit or Discord, so cannot say. My feelings are personal only. I know of baseball and soccer forums that are moderated, but then in these groups the topic is very confined, where only baseball or soccer is discussed. Are you saying that ONLY classical music should be discussed? And no disagreements? Doesn't music embrace a lot more than music?

Ray Hall, Taree

On Saturday, March 11, 2023 at 4:24:09 PM UTC+11, Owen Hartnett wrote:
>
>
> From unmoderated to moderated.
> Changing a group from unmoderated to moderated is "strongly discouraged" - which, in practice, means "practically impossible."
> There are many News Service Providers who would not make the change. Some people would see a moderated group, others with different NSPs would see the moderated version.
> Such changes in the past have cultivated massive resentments. Leaving the original group intact and creating a companion moderated group allows group members to have a choice between the two different kinds of newsgroups on the same topic.
> In all likelihood, the board won't even publish an RFD to change a group from unmoderated to moderated. A proposal for such a change should not be submitted unless the group finds a way to demonstrate virtual unanimity. We strongly recommend that you instead spend your effort on learning how to use filters or how to create a moderated companion to the original group.
>
> -Owen

The idea is to avoid all discussions of antisemitism, an area of debate from which reason has long since fled in this group and doubtless many others. Unless we wish to discuss in a positive light the achievements of Peter Brook, Jonathan Miller, Barrie Kotsky and Elijah Moshinsky in the opera house and elsewhere ...

Andrew Clarke
Canberra