On 10/14/2023 2:26 AM, Keith Thompson wrote:
> "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> writes:
>> On 10/13/2023 3:33 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>> "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> writes:
>>> [...]
>>>> Iirc, Google actually banned this NG from its platform...
>>> No, and please check before making claims like that.
>>> https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.c
>>> [...]
>>
>> You don't remember them banning it in the past, then restoring it?
>
> No, I don't -- and I thought you were saying it's currently banned.
> Sorry, I misunderstood.
>

Well, I could of worded my response much better. So, I am sorry as well.
Thanks Keith.

On 10/14/2023 5:03 AM, Fritz Feldhase wrote:
> On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 10:45:50 PM UTC+2, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>> On 10/13/2023 12:23 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>> Fritz Feldhase <franz.fri...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>> On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 8:57:38 PM UTC+2, Fritz Feldhase wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Google does shit for stopping this flood of spam. :-(
>>>>>
>>>> Ping.
>>>>
>>> Google, particularly the people in charge of Google Groups, don't read
>>> this newsgroup. You've sent your complaint to people who want to
>>> discuss the C programming language. We can't do anything about it.
>>>
>> Iirc, Google actually banned this NG from its platform...
>
> No, it didn't. After all, I'm posting via groups.google.com here.
>
> The strange thing: This flood of spam was stopped in comp.lang.c++. Spam messages were even DELETED from the group.
>
> So why not here (in this NG) too? :-o

I failed to word my response properly. Google has most certainly banned
comp.lang.c in the past.

Spiros Bousbouras to Anton Shepelev:

> > comp.lang.c.moderated
>
> If you want to revive comp.lang.c.moderated , you should
> probably continue from
> Message-ID: <p2ogdo$u4j$1@news.misty.com>

Thanks for the archived article.

> I'm not sure which is the most appropriate group to
> discuss the technicalities

This is pretty well answered here:
<https://www.big-8.org/wiki/Moderated_Newsgroups#How_does_a_group_change_moderators?>

> For technical information , one might even try contacting
> through email the moderators of other moderated groups
> like comp.compilers and uk.legal.moderated to ask what
> software they use. The latter in particular has a neat
> feature where there is a web page associated with the
> group where you see a list of submitted posts as well as
> their status i.e. waiting for approval , rejected , etc.

Sounds like STUMP:
<http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/stump/>
It is free, but they allow commerical web hosting, for which
the moderators of many newsgroups might pay collectively, to
save the effort of maintaing a STUMP instance of a *nix
server.

> Having said all that , there wasn't much enthusiasm for
> reviving comp.lang.c.moderated back in 2018 and the
> regulars on comp.lang.c remain more or less the same

Perhaps we should make some effort to keep the world aware
of Usenet in general and CLC in particular, via some mild
and unobtrusive promotion, such as referring to CLC articles
in social media (Stack Overflow), mentioning CLC in one's
bio or contancts page in personal and social pages...

> I expect you'd still get all the discussions on what's to
> be done about all the spam on comp.lang.c .

While nobody is using CLCM, this might be a good time to
find some willing moderators and to set up a basic
moderation toolchain. If this group continues to be
bombarded by SPAM and posters like The D*ct*r, the moderated
version will be making more and more sense.

Is not a single reader of this newsgroup intersted in having
a functional .moderated counterpart, let alone becoming a
moderator? When the moderation process is up and running,
the brunt of the moderator's work can be delegated to a
whitelist of "sane" posters, with but an occasional manual
interference. Whitelisting requests may be discussed by e-mail
or here...

--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

On 10/14/2023 3:06 PM, Anton Shepelev wrote:
> Spiros Bousbouras to Anton Shepelev:
>
>>> comp.lang.c.moderated
>>
>> If you want to revive comp.lang.c.moderated , you should
>> probably continue from
>> Message-ID: <p2ogdo$u4j$1@news.misty.com>
>
> Thanks for the archived article.
>
>> I'm not sure which is the most appropriate group to
>> discuss the technicalities
>
> This is pretty well answered here:
> <https://www.big-8.org/wiki/Moderated_Newsgroups#How_does_a_group_change_moderators?>
>
>> For technical information , one might even try contacting
>> through email the moderators of other moderated groups
>> like comp.compilers and uk.legal.moderated to ask what
>> software they use. The latter in particular has a neat
>> feature where there is a web page associated with the
>> group where you see a list of submitted posts as well as
>> their status i.e. waiting for approval , rejected , etc.
>
> Sounds like STUMP:
> <http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/stump/>
> It is free, but they allow commerical web hosting, for which
> the moderators of many newsgroups might pay collectively, to
> save the effort of maintaing a STUMP instance of a *nix
> server.
>
>> Having said all that , there wasn't much enthusiasm for
>> reviving comp.lang.c.moderated back in 2018 and the
>> regulars on comp.lang.c remain more or less the same
>
> Perhaps we should make some effort to keep the world aware
> of Usenet in general and CLC in particular, via some mild
> and unobtrusive promotion, such as referring to CLC articles
> in social media (Stack Overflow), mentioning CLC in one's
> bio or contancts page in personal and social pages...
>
>> I expect you'd still get all the discussions on what's to
>> be done about all the spam on comp.lang.c .
>
> While nobody is using CLCM, this might be a good time to
> find some willing moderators and to set up a basic
> moderation toolchain. If this group continues to be
> bombarded by SPAM and posters like The D*ct*r, the moderated
> version will be making more and more sense.
>
> Is not a single reader of this newsgroup intersted in having
> a functional .moderated counterpart, let alone becoming a
> moderator? When the moderation process is up and running,
> the brunt of the moderator's work can be delegated to a
> whitelist of "sane" posters, with but an occasional manual
> interference. Whitelisting requests may be discussed by e-mail
> or here...
>

Perhaps a "trial list" before an absolute whitelist for a moderated
group? Those who fail the "trial" shall be banned. 3 times your out?

Chris M. Thomasson:

> Perhaps a "trial list" before an absolute whitelist for a
> moderated group? Those who fail the "trial" shall be
> banned. 3 times your out?

One must start with whatever the chosen moderation software
already supports out of the .gzip, so to say. Futhermore, a
discussion of these details is at this stage premature. I
mentioned a moderation strategy merely to illustrate the
relatively small regular effort that will be required of the
moderator, and he is not there to exercise his tyrant
complexes, but rather to keep out the SPAM and the few
pernicious, unregenerate, and notorious scandalists.

--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

On 10/14/2023 3:44 PM, Anton Shepelev wrote:
> Chris M. Thomasson:
>
>> Perhaps a "trial list" before an absolute whitelist for a
>> moderated group? Those who fail the "trial" shall be
>> banned. 3 times your out?
>
> One must start with whatever the chosen moderation software
> already supports out of the .gzip, so to say. Futhermore, a
> discussion of these details is at this stage premature. I
> mentioned a moderation strategy merely to illustrate the
> relatively small regular effort that will be required of the
> moderator, and he is not there to exercise his tyrant
> complexes, but rather to keep out the SPAM and the few
> pernicious, unregenerate, and notorious scandalists.
>

Sounds fair enough to me.

On Sun, 15 Oct 2023 01:06:27 +0300
Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> wrote:
> Perhaps we should make some effort to keep the world aware
> of Usenet in general and CLC in particular, via some mild
> and unobtrusive promotion, such as referring to CLC articles
> in social media (Stack Overflow), mentioning CLC in one's
> bio or contancts page in personal and social pages...

I'm all for that but it's not much related to reviving comp.lang.c.moderated
..Note also that one of the main selling points of usenet at present in
comparison to most other online discussion media is the lack of centralised
control. A moderated group misses out on that selling point.

> Is not a single reader of this newsgroup intersted in having
> a functional .moderated counterpart, let alone becoming a
> moderator?

I'm not that bothered whether c.l.c.moderated gets revived or not. In
general I don't see much point in having moderated and unmoderated newsgroups
on the same topic and as a general (political) point , I consider it best
when everyone can make their own decisions what to filter and what not to
filter. Some groups in the past changed from unmoderated to moderated
(comp.ai is an example) because it was decided that the unmoderated
discussion had become totally disrupted due to whatever factors (usually some
bad posters , at least according to some people's definition of bad ; I've
never heard of an example where spam was the reason) but on topic discussion
on comp.lang.c is doing just fine at present.

> When the moderation process is up and running,
> the brunt of the moderator's work can be delegated to a
> whitelist of "sane" posters, with but an occasional manual
> interference. Whitelisting requests may be discussed by e-mail
> or here...

Certainly not here. The possibility that someone may decide to air
on comp.lang.c their grievances about a decision the moderator(s)
of c.l.c.moderated made is an argument *against* reviving
c.l.c.moderated .

--
Bart : We want a stricter language moving forward
Scott Lurndal : Are you using the royal "we" here? The plural definite
article surely doesn't apply.
Tim Rentsch : I think the narcissistic "we" is more likely.

On 2023-10-13, Fritz Feldhase wrote:
> Google does shit for stopping this flood of spam. :-(

%BOS
%Score created on Thu Oct 19 23:25:36 2023
% block all korean language subjects

[comp.lang.c]
Score: =-9999
%Expires:
Subject: [가-힣]+
%EOS