On Sat, 10 Jun 2023 00:15:29 +0100, Sn!pe wrote:
> Certainly there are very many read-only newsservers.
> How many of those servers permit unregistered posting?
I do not know the answer where I guess that's your fundamental point.
However, to further the enlightened discussion without dismissing your
concerns, offhand, I am guessing these (at least) accept unregistered
postings (where others might - but I'm pretty sure each of these do).
news.mixmin.net:563
news.tambov.ru:563
paganini.bofh.team:563
news.ausics.net:563
However some, like ausics & tambov accept unregistered postings under
conditions conducive to the newsgroups or country they wish to serve.
> FTR: I echo your philanthropic views.
Good. We are soul mates in the regard that these server admins (and others
who require registration of some sort) are to be honored & revered for the
service they provide, and let's not forget, for which this ng is focused.
> However, I do not agree
> with unregistered anonymous posting, whether for the benefit
> of those who live under oppressive goverment or not.
Let's accept that as your point of view that "unregistered" postings are
what you disagree with even when it helps posters maintain anonymity.
How does that change your answer to my fundamental question which was to
point out that what dizum does for nntp server:563 posting (ignoring the
mail2news feature) is no different than what mixmin does, or bofh or tambov
(for educational newsgroups) or ausics (for Australian IPs) does.
How is what Steve Crook does with mixmin different (to you) than what Alex
de Joode at dixum does, or what Ivo Gandolfo does for bofh, or even, if we
delve into the not-so-distant past, what Paolo at aioe or netfront did for
those same nntp users (until circumstances caused them to break it off)?
Even Mozilla did it for a while with
news.mozilla.org:563 for their
newsgroups (as you're likely well aware, as did gmane, but differently so).
Why your dislike of what Alex does and not what Steve & Ivo also do?
> Such
> posting is the domain of trolls and net-abusers who seriously
> damage Usenet, sometimes to the point of making it unusable.
To be sure, nobody can disagree that abusers are the bane of the nntp
server admins, and I won't defend the trolls any more than you would.
However, many nntp admins implement methods to control those trolls, e.g.,
Ivo severely limits the number of posts per IP address while also limiting
the content of the body (e.g., the bofh badurl and badword filters are
Draconian, to say the least) while Paolo used to limit the number of posts
and the newsgroup list (e.g., he removed alt.home.repair for one, due to
the inordinate amount of spam from Dean Hoffman and those of his ilk).
Moving into the realm of those who do require registration, Wolfgang at
eternal-september limits the number of nyms allowed per account, while
Benjamin Gufler adds an "X-User-ID to solani posts, while Alexander
Samoylyk puts your IP address in the header in the clear and RetroGuy at
Rocksolid used to publish the username and IP address in the clear in the
headers (recently suddenly corrected, AFAICT) - all presumably as a way to
openly combat abuse of their precious free nntp server overall resources.
Every free nntp admin combats abuse in their own ways, do they not?
Given that premise (which may not be correct as I am no expert), my
fundamental question to you, given I assume each of these heroic free news
server admins faithfully combats abuse in their own ways, why do you
elevate Alex de Joode above all others?
More simply stated, what's so different as to be the source of wrath?