Robo-Moderation of alt.home.repair

[Dick Adams]

In my rarely humble opinion, alt.home.repair is the best
of the USENET newsgroups. Unfortunately, it suffers from
spam and other worthless stuff. Is it time to implement
robo-moderation? You decide!

Benefits:
Minimal garbage (No SPAM and mimimal other stuff)
A pre-approved list of posters
A burn-before-read list of wankers
both lists are subject to change.

Problem:
Lots of posts from people who are not on either list

Costs:
Volunteer co-moderators to approve posts from people who are not on either list.
Voluntary donations to cover server costs.
Volunteer to deal directly with wankers

When I went to Australia in November 2007, Misc.Taxes.Moderated went
to robo-moderation and now requires less than an hour a week of my
time. It was always SPAM & garbage free. Nothing has changed.


Dick
--
Richard D. Adams, CPA
Moderator: Misc.Taxes.Moderated
Moderator: Misc.Legal.Moderated

[Existential Angst]

"Dick Adams" <rda...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:k7bt4s$70e$1...@reader1.panix.com...

> In my rarely humble opinion, alt.home.repair is the best
> of the USENET newsgroups. Unfortunately, it suffers from
> spam and other worthless stuff. Is it time to implement
> robo-moderation? You decide!
>
> Benefits:
> Minimal garbage (No SPAM and mimimal other stuff)
> A pre-approved list of posters
> A burn-before-read list of wankers
> both lists are subject to change.
>
> Problem:
> Lots of posts from people who are not on either list
>
> Costs:
> Volunteer co-moderators to approve posts from people who are not on
> either list.
> Voluntary donations to cover server costs.
> Volunteer to deal directly with wankers
>
> When I went to Australia in November 2007, Misc.Taxes.Moderated went
> to robo-moderation and now requires less than an hour a week of my
> time. It was always SPAM & garbage free. Nothing has changed.

I dunno.... some of the antics are fun.
If people didn't let the spam affect/deter them, it really shouldn't affect
the group.
rec.crafts.metalworking, rec.autos.tech are other very good groups, with
super-knowledgeable people.
As long as people keep posting quality stuff, the group should thrive.
However, malicious spam can indeed destroy a group.
--
EA

[Moe DeLoughan]

On 11/6/2012 2:49 PM, Dick Adams wrote:
> In my rarely humble opinion, alt.home.repair is the best
> of the USENET newsgroups. Unfortunately, it suffers from
> spam and other worthless stuff. Is it time to implement
> robo-moderation? You decide!

I did. I use filters. You don't need a moderator to make your
decisions for you, you want a moderator to decide what everybody else
gets to see. Use a decent newsreader with filters and just choose for
yourself. Let everyone else choose how they wish to deal with it.

Usenet newsgroups are like hanging out in a bar or a bus stop. There's
a lot of conversations going on, and you aren't going to be interested
in a lot of them. Once in awhile you'll get a drunk or a crazy yelling
about something. In real life you ignore them. You can do that here, too.

[Oren]

On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 20:49:32 +0000 (UTC), rda...@panix.com (Dick
Adams) wrote:

>In my rarely humble opinion, alt.home.repair is the best
>of the USENET newsgroups. Unfortunately, it suffers from
>spam and other worthless stuff. Is it time to implement
>robo-moderation? You decide!

No. Keep in mind that alt.x.x groups are anarchist by nature.

I don't need more government in my life.

[The Daring Dufas]

On 11/6/2012 2:49 PM, Dick Adams wrote:

Don't be a dick, Dick. Setup your own filters instead of worrying about
what everyone else looks at. ^_^

TDD

[HeyBub]

Dick Adams wrote:
> In my rarely humble opinion, alt.home.repair is the best
> of the USENET newsgroups. Unfortunately, it suffers from
> spam and other worthless stuff. Is it time to implement
> robo-moderation? You decide!
>
> Benefits:
> Minimal garbage (No SPAM and mimimal other stuff)
> A pre-approved list of posters
> A burn-before-read list of wankers
> both lists are subject to change.
>
> Problem:
> Lots of posts from people who are not on either list
>
> Costs:
> Volunteer co-moderators to approve posts from people who are not on
> either list. Voluntary donations to cover server costs.
> Volunteer to deal directly with wankers
>
> When I went to Australia in November 2007, Misc.Taxes.Moderated went
> to robo-moderation and now requires less than an hour a week of my
> time. It was always SPAM & garbage free. Nothing has changed.
>
>

A similar thing happened to alt.comp.freeware.

A couple of serious posters started a moderated newsgroup on Yahoo and rid
themselves of the trolls, cut-purses, nit-pickers, pollywogs, squints,
nay-sayers, goblins, scrots, stink-eyes, and people circling the drain.

[Red Green]

"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in
news:_oCdnXj6ZKRvDwTN...@earthlink.com:

What was left? A couple of posters?!

[Red Green]

"Existential Angst" <fit...@optonline.net> wrote in
news:5099804f$0$9841$607e...@cv.net:

How would I feel superior without spammers?

:-)

[Home Guy]

Dick Adams wrote:

> In my rarely humble opinion, alt.home.repair is the best
> of the USENET newsgroups. Unfortunately, it suffers from
> spam and other worthless stuff. Is it time to implement
> robo-moderation? You decide!

I don't know where you're seeing spam.

Outside of google-gropes (which nobody should be using to experience
usenet) I see very little spam posted here.

My definition of spam is posting made by an automated process or bot, or
posts of a commercial or traffic-driven nature (that usually is posted
from IP's located in india, pakistan, and other similar places).

> Benefits:
> Minimal garbage (No SPAM and mimimal other stuff)

Please cite some examples of spam.

> A pre-approved list of posters
> A burn-before-read list of wankers
> both lists are subject to change.
>
> Problem:
> Lots of posts from people who are not on either list

I suggest that you create either

misc.home.repair.moderated

or

alt.home.repair.moderated

And see how many people participate.

[Stormin Mormon]

Set up a parallel list, and see if anyone posts.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Dick Adams" <rda...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:k7bt4s$70e$1...@reader1.panix.com...

[hr(bob) hofmann@att.net]

No, you can always filter if certain spammers become a real problem.

[Jon Danniken]

On 11/06/2012 03:50 PM, G. Morgan wrote:

> HeyBub wrote:
>
>> A similar thing happened to alt.comp.freeware.
>>
>> A couple of serious posters started a moderated newsgroup on Yahoo and rid
>> themselves of the trolls, cut-purses, nit-pickers, pollywogs, squints,
>> nay-sayers, goblins, scrots, stink-eyes, and people circling the drain.
>

> And the attendance is low, plus the content gets stolen from the Usenet
> group.

Yep. The guitar group (alt.guitar) has also flown the usenet coop, but
in their case they made it a damn facebook group, which, IMNSHO, is the
worst option available. Apparantly most of the contributing
inhabitants of the group made the switch, however.


As for a moderated group, OP is always free to make an
"alt.home.repair.moderated" group, and seeing how that goes (I think a
lot of the legitimate posters would contribute), but the likelihood of
modifying the existing a.h.r. group is pretty much nil.

Jon

[Ed Pawlowski]

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 01:56:06 -0800, Jon Danniken
<jonSPAM...@yaSMPAhoo.com> wrote:

>
>As for a moderated group, OP is always free to make an
>"alt.home.repair.moderated" group, and seeing how that goes (I think a
>lot of the legitimate posters would contribute), but the likelihood of
>modifying the existing a.h.r. group is pretty much nil.
>
>Jon

Yep, and I'm free not to go there. I don't like the idea of a
moderator. Will we have to wear brown shirts when posting?

[Jon Danniken]

I don't know, Ed; you'd have to ask OP about uniform specifics. .

If I was to set up something like this, I would whitelist the
overwhelming majority of posters (like yourself) who post actual
content, so basically you wouldn't even notice it.

The point would just be to filter out people who come to bicker about
things like politics/current events, while allowing pretty much anything
else relating to home repair and/or general tinkering and/or general
handymanliness/tools/metalworking/woodworking/auto repair/appliance
repair/computers/networking/cableTV/, those sorts of topics. Basically
whatever people want to talk about that isn't political BS.

But that's just me, and I'm not the one setting this up. ;)

Jon

[Kurt Ullman]

In article <k7dhq7$u66$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,

Jon Danniken <jonSPAM...@yaSMPAhoo.com> wrote:

> The point would just be to filter out people who come to bicker about
> things like politics/current events,

Which you already have the power to do with filters that come with
Usenet readers.

> But that's just me, and I'm not the one setting this up. ;)

But you could, at least on your computer.


>
> Jon
--
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late
to work within the system, but too early to shoot
the bastards."-- Claire Wolfe

[Jon Danniken]

On 11/07/2012 03:56 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
> In article <k7dhq7$u66$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,
> Jon Danniken <jonSPAM...@yaSMPAhoo.com> wrote:
>
>> The point would just be to filter out people who come to bicker about
>> things like politics/current events,
>
> Which you already have the power to do with filters that come with
> Usenet readers.
>
>> But that's just me, and I'm not the one setting this up. ;)
> But you could, at least on your computer.

How about we let naked girls dance on the median strip on the freeway?
You are, of course, free to ignore them, so it won't be any problem for
you, right?

Jon

[Kurt Ullman]

In article <k7dijo$lh$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,

Jon Danniken <jonSPAM...@yaSMPAhoo.com> wrote:

>
> How about we let naked girls dance on the median strip on the freeway?
> You are, of course, free to ignore them, so it won't be any problem for
> you, right?
>
> Jon

Gee if you keep up with these ridiculously outrageous comparisons,
I may have to exercise my filters and take you out. Not sure how
something that goes against many laws and endangers people going 70 mph
or more even remotely compares to sitting on your ass in a chair and
demanding others bow to your wishes.

[MurphyM]

rda...@panix.com (Dick Adams) wrote in news:k7bt4s$70e$1
@reader1.panix.com:

> When I went to Australia in November 2007, Misc.Taxes.Moderated went
> to robo-moderation and now requires less than an hour a week of my
> time. It was always SPAM & garbage free. Nothing has changed.
>
>
> Dick
> --
> Richard D. Adams, CPA

> Moderator: Misc.Taxes.Moderated (M.T.M.)
> Moderator: Misc.Legal.Moderated
>
>

I see what you want. Your're the guy who loves to have posters in M.T.M
refer to you as "esteemed moderator" and who loves to remind people that
your word is law.

If anyone is considering this suggestion, go to M.T.M and take a look at
how this guy "moderates". It's a classic example of a man without a dick
(no coincidence there) trying to make people he has one.

[Vinny From NYC]

On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 16:25:17 -0500, "Existential Angst"
<fit...@optonline.net> wrote in <5099804f$0$9841$607e...@cv.net> Re
Re: Robo-Moderation of alt.home.repair:

>I dunno.... some of the antics are fun.
>If people didn't let the spam affect/deter them, it really shouldn't affect
>the group.
>rec.crafts.metalworking, rec.autos.tech are other very good groups, with
>super-knowledgeable people.
>As long as people keep posting quality stuff, the group should thrive.
>However, malicious spam can indeed destroy a group.

Exactly

[Vinny From NYC]

On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 15:26:55 -0600, Moe DeLoughan <m...@notmine.null>
wrote in <k7bvb2$8t9$1...@dont-email.me> Re Re: Robo-Moderation of
alt.home.repair:

>Usenet newsgroups are like hanging out in a bar or a bus stop. There's
>a lot of conversations going on, and you aren't going to be interested
>in a lot of them. Once in awhile you'll get a drunk or a crazy yelling
>about something. In real life you ignore them. You can do that here, too.

Well put.

[Home Guy]

Vinny From NYC wrote:

> > However, malicious spam can indeed destroy a group.
>
> Exactly

What spam is being posted to this group?

Do you people even know what spam is - in the usenet context?

[micky]

On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 20:49:32 +0000 (UTC), rda...@panix.com (Dick
Adams) wrote:

>In my rarely humble opinion, alt.home.repair is the best
>of the USENET newsgroups. Unfortunately, it suffers from
>spam and other worthless stuff. Is it time to implement
>robo-moderation? You decide!

I can surely see the need for moderation in the two groups you
moderate (one of which I often reed, as you probably know.)

But here I just wish people were reliable about putting OT at the
start of the subject line and ALSO as the first word in the text, when
it's not about home repair. On principle, I rarely reply to an
off-topic post that isn't correctly labeled OT.

I see newsgroups as more of a community, for discussing things that
interest people, and there are a lot of topics I fined interesting for
which either A) no active newsgroup is it on topic , B) I don't want
to hunt for a newsgroup just to ask one question, C) If I ask one
question on another newsgroup, I won't know of those who answer, who
is a crackpot, who is an idiot, who makes up "facts" versus those
whose opinion is usually correct and at least sensible and based on
facts.

Even the political discussions here, which have some malarkey and some
obnoxiousness are, afaict, more sensible than in political newsgroups
which have large numbers of idiot ideologues on both or all sides.

>Benefits:
> Minimal garbage (No SPAM and mimimal other stuff)
> A pre-approved list of posters
> A burn-before-read list of wankers
> both lists are subject to change.

I have filters in my software to remove the few real wankers and
vulgar people who post here.

>
>Problem:
> Lots of posts from people who are not on either list

Yes, there seem to be a lot of new visitors here, who have a new
problem with their home repair.

>
>Costs:
> Volunteer co-moderators to approve posts from people who are not on either list.
> Voluntary donations to cover server costs.
> Volunteer to deal directly with wankers
>
>When I went to Australia in November 2007, Misc.Taxes.Moderated went
>to robo-moderation and now requires less than an hour a week of my
>time. It was always SPAM & garbage free. Nothing has changed.

We really don't get that much spam or garbage here, and because the
topic here, home repair, is ethnic or religious, we get few if any
hate posts. Normal spam is not that much and not a problem. It's
hate that I hate.

>Dick

[TomR]

Dick Adams wrote:
> In my rarely humble opinion, alt.home.repair is the best
> of the USENET newsgroups. Unfortunately, it suffers from
> spam and other worthless stuff. Is it time to implement
> robo-moderation? You decide!

> When I went to Australia in November 2007, Misc.Taxes.Moderated went
> to robo-moderation and now requires less than an hour a week of my
> time. It was always SPAM & garbage free. Nothing has changed.

>Richard D. Adams, CPA
> Moderator: Misc.Taxes.Moderated
> Moderator: Misc.Legal.Moderated

I think that's an interesting question, and I have some thoughts and
questions of my own regarding the idea.

How difficult would it be to create an alt.home.repair.moderated newsgroup?
How is that done? And, if I were to set up a similar moderated newsgroup
(not related to alt.home.repair), with me as one of the moderators, where
could I find out about getting the robo-moderation software you mentioned
and how to set it up and use it?

Overall, I agree that this alt.home.repair newsgroup is one of the best
Usenet newsgroups around. I use it all the time along with a very few
others. I have seen other newsgroups get overrun with nonsense to the point
that either the newsgroup rarely has any on-point posts among the mass of
off-topic posts (such at rec.boats that I used to frequent), or they get
completely annihilated by spammers such as at the
alt.social-security-disability newsgroup (that one used to be great but got
killed off by some relentless psycho). And, I see a trend here of more and
more people posting political opinions, off-topic articles, etc. and I
wonder if eventually this group will go the way of groups like rec.boats.
Some of the people who post political and off-topic opinion crap at
rec.boats and help make it become useless are posting the same stuff here
more and more.

I do use Misc.Taxes.Moderated and Misc.Legal.Moderated from time to time.
They are excellent in the sense that there is no crap on either group. But,
robo-moderation or not, the reality is that it takes a long time for new
posts to appear on those groups -- often a few days or more. I know that
you are a volunteer moderator there, and your criteria regarding moderation
seems to work well. But, for some reason, new posts only appear every few
days or so. That makes me think that the robo-moderation part isn't working
well. I only post anonymously on any newsgroups, and many others do the
same. Maybe that's why the robo-moderation doesn't work, meaning maybe
anonymous posters like me can't get "whitelisted" -- I don't know.

Can the robo-moderation software for any newsgroup be set up so that all
posts are whitelisted until there is a problem poster, and then only the
problem poster get blacklisted and moderated before their posts go through?
And, can the robo-moderation software be set up to moderate/blacklist
certain MAC ID numbers rather than just the poster's username and/or email
address? That way, people who just keep changing their name to post
complete sick and malicious crap from the same computer would get
automatically blacklisted.

Thanks. I look forward to your reply and feedback.

[TomR]

Dick Adams wrote:
> In my rarely humble opinion, alt.home.repair is the best
> of the USENET newsgroups. Unfortunately, it suffers from
> spam and other worthless stuff. Is it time to implement
> robo-moderation?

To: Dick Adams

You started this thread, and I wrote the following in response. Any chance
that you will follow up on your original post with any additional
information etc. in response to what I and/or others wrote? Thanks.

[MurphyM]

"TomR" <To...@tomrljp5.lhd> wrote in news:k7rubg$7ij$1...@dont-email.me:

>
> To: Dick Adams
>
> You started this thread, and I wrote the following in response. Any
> chance that you will follow up on your original post with any
> additional information etc. in response to what I and/or others wrote?

If you want a reply, you must refer to him as "esteemed moderator". Now
that you have been reminded, he may reply.

[Oren]

Instead of "esteemed moderator" can he be addressed as "hall
monitor'?

[TomR]

It may be that some of the totally unnecessary personal attack posts caused
him to not want to bother getting back into the discussion.

[MurphyM]

"TomR" <To...@tomrljp5.lhd> wrote in news:k7s4jk$g1h$1...@dont-email.me:

Or it may be that he is smart enough to realize that there isn't much
interest here in A.H.R. for an "esteemed moderator" style of moderation. I
can't imagine that type of autocratic dictatorial nit-picking moderation
and the concomitant fawning toady posting style of participants would
appeal to many people here. In comparison A.H.R. is the wild-west. Go to
misc.taxes.moderated and do a search on the term "esteemed moderator" and
see what I mean.

[Moe DeLoughan]

If he doesn't like what certain people have to say, he can filter
them. But he doesn't want to control his actions, he wants to control
other people's. That's the issue here.

Filters are for people who want to take charge of what they read.
Moderators are for people who want to take charge of what everybody reads.

[MurphyM]

Moe DeLoughan <m...@null.com> wrote in
news:k7tjjg$ntc$1...@speranza.aioe.org:

Very well put Moe.

[Wes Groleau]

On 11-13-2012 08:46, MurphyM wrote:
> can't imagine that type of autocratic dictatorial nit-picking moderation
> and the concomitant fawning toady posting style of participants would
> appeal to many people here. In comparison A.H.R. is the wild-west. Go to
> misc.taxes.moderated and do a search on the term "esteemed moderator" and
> see what I mean.

As an "outsider," I wouldn't be able to reliably distinguish between
sarcasm and fawning without lurking far longer than my interest could
handle, i.e., about thirty seconds.

--
Wes Groleau

Nobody believes a theoretical analysis — except the guy who did it.
Everybody believes an experimental analysis — except the guy who did it.
— Unknown

[Dick Adams]

TomR <To...@tomrljp5.lhd> wrote:
> Dick Adams wrote:

>> In my rarely humble opinion, alt.home.repair is the best
>> of the USENET newsgroups. Unfortunately, it suffers from
>> spam and other worthless stuff. Is it time to implement
>> robo-moderation? You decide!

>> ...

> I think that's an interesting question, and I have some thoughts and
> questions of my own regarding the idea.
>
> How difficult would it be to create an alt.home.repair.moderated newsgroup?
> How is that done? And, if I were to set up a similar moderated newsgroup
> (not related to alt.home.repair), with me as one of the moderators, where
> could I find out about getting the robo-moderation software you mentioned

> and how to set it up and use it? ....

To get a moderated USENET newsgroup, you have to prepare a charter
and have it put to a vote. I will ask my robo guy to send you an
e-mail,

> ...

> Maybe that's why the robo-moderation doesn't work, meaning maybe
> anonymous posters like me can't get "whitelisted" -- I don't know.

I always take exception to the terms 'white list' and' black list'.
My lists are 'Marginally Sane' and 'Burn Before Read'.

Dick

[Dick Adams]

Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.net> wrote:

> Yep, and I'm free not to go there. I don't like the idea of a
> moderator. Will we have to wear brown shirts when posting?

You'd only wear a brown shirt if you're a brown shirt kind of guy.
Moderation is not censorship and censorship is not moderation.

As Moe wrote "Usenet newsgroups are like hanging out in a bar ...".
That's an excellent analogy because as you like it, it's your kind
of bar - and that's what counts.

[Dick Adams]

MurphyM <Mur...@gmail2.com> wrote:

> I see what you want. Your're the guy who loves to have posters in M.T.M
> refer to you as "esteemed moderator" and who loves to remind people that
> your word is law.
>
> If anyone is considering this suggestion, go to M.T.M and take a look at
> how this guy "moderates". It's a classic example of a man without a dick
> (no coincidence there) trying to make people he has one.

There are people who are polite and the are people who are ignorant. It's
been a rare day over the past 17 years that a submission was rejected except
for being illegal, spam, or an ad hominum attack. Insulting people is not
one of the ways to make friends and influence people.

Dick

[A Michigan Attorney]

On 11/13/2012 8:57 AM, Moe DeLoughan wrote:

> Filters are for people who want to take charge of what they read.
> Moderators are for people who want to take charge of what everybody reads.

I lurk here, but I often post in misc.legal.moderated. I take your
comments as objection to moderation in general, not to Dick's work in
particular. If I'm wrong about that, please correct me. FWIW, Dick
does a fine job of moderating M.L.M.

Your statements, while nice sound bites, are misleading. Moderation is
actually a form of filtering. It's intelligent and is essentially done
at the server level.

The root of your objection to moderation seems to be that you don't get
to control the filtering. That's a legitimate concern, but you should
consider the upside too -- which is that many readers are uninterested
(or unable) to implement or effectively manage their own filters. That
impacts a newsgroup as a whole because spam and trolls drive away
potential contributors to the newsgroup. And moderation -- when done
properly -- only blocks junk mail. So by opposing moderation, what you
are really doing is goring everyone else's oxen to preserve your own
sense of freedom.

[John C]

On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 20:49:32 +0000 (UTC), rda...@panix.com (Dick Adams)

wrote in <k7bt4s$70e$1...@reader1.panix.com> Re Robo-Moderation of
alt.home.repair:

>In my rarely humble opinion, alt.home.repair is the best
>of the USENET newsgroups. Unfortunately, it suffers from
>spam and other worthless stuff. Is it time to implement

>robo-moderation? You decide!


So, in your rarely humble opinion is AHR going moderated or not?

[ChairMan]

NO, if he wants it to be moderated he would have to start a
new group.
It's my understanding that once a group has a charter and
has been established it can't be changed.
I believe the answers can be found in alt.news.config and is
also the group to establish a new moderated a.h.r.
I could be wrong, as my memory is not as good as it used to
be

[gregz]

AHRM

Greg

[Home Guy]

A Michigan Attorney wrote:

> The root of your objection to moderation seems to be that you don't
> get to control the filtering. That's a legitimate concern, but you
> should consider the upside too -- which is that many readers are
> uninterested (or unable) to implement or effectively manage their
> own filters.

> So by opposing moderation, what you are really doing is goring
> everyone else's oxen to preserve your own sense of freedom.

Something you need to realize is that there is a lot of off-topic
chit-chat here, in between posts answering people's questions about
drywall or power washers or generators.

Here's an idea about moderation that I dare you (or anyone else) to
shoot down.

Any usenet newsgroup that is moderated should operate this way:

Any post that is "rejected" by the moderator should automatically be
posted in a secondary group.

For example, we are currently discussing alt.home.repair. Because of
usenet charter and past conventions, it will never be possible to
convert this into a moderated group. You would have to tack on
".moderated" to the end of the group-name (I would think). I also
*believe* that moderated groups in the alt hierarchy is frowned upon for
ideological reasons.

So let's suppose we are talking about rec.home.repair.moderated - I
haven't checked but I assume that it doesn't exist. So we have a
moderated group about home repair. Any posts that are rejected by the
moderator should automatically be posted in the companion group
"rec.home.repair.rejected". That way, anyone who is interested can see
which posts are being rejected - and can react accordingly.

All moderated usenet newsgroups *should have* been set up that way, from
day one.

[MurphyM]

"ChairMan" <nos...@thanks.com> wrote in news:xAVos.85699$mg6.23122
@fed02.iad:

> John C wrote:
>> On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 20:49:32 +0000 (UTC), rda...@panix.com
>> (Dick
>> Adams) wrote in <k7bt4s$70e$1...@reader1.panix.com> Re
>> Robo-Moderation of
>> alt.home.repair:
>>
>>> In my rarely humble opinion, alt.home.repair is the best
>>> of the USENET newsgroups. Unfortunately, it suffers from
>>> spam and other worthless stuff. Is it time to implement
>>> robo-moderation? You decide!
>>
>>
>> So, in your rarely humble opinion is AHR going moderated
>> or not?
>
> NO, if he wants it to be moderated he would have to start a
> new group.

Well, nice try at a power-grab Dicky Boi, but as ChairMan points out, you
can see the posters here are a different, more robust breed than the
sycophants in your tax group.

[A Michigan Attorney]

On 11/14/2012 8:28 PM, Home Guy wrote:

> A Michigan Attorney wrote:
>
>> So by opposing moderation, what you are really doing is goring
>> everyone else's oxen to preserve your own sense of freedom.
>
> Something you need to realize is that there is a lot of off-topic
> chit-chat here, in between posts answering people's questions about
> drywall or power washers or generators.

Yes, I know that from lurking. Whether OT chit-chat would be allowed in
a moderated group would be a policy matter. Moderation doesn't have to
be draconian. It can be as liberal as the chartering members decide to
make it.

> Here's an idea about moderation that I dare you (or anyone else) to
> shoot down.
>
> Any usenet newsgroup that is moderated should operate this way:
>
> Any post that is "rejected" by the moderator should automatically be
> posted in a secondary group.

I think that's a great idea. The posts are diverted instead of destroyed.