We need a moderator folks...
Nadir A. El Farra
I really hate to say this, but I'm changing my mind on the
moderator issue - I've seen enough non-survivalism posts lately to do the
trick. I'm sorry, but white supremacy, ET's, and militias are all well
and good as points to discuss (hey - free speech, right?), but in terms of
subject matter they can't objectively be considered survial-oriented. Oh
sure, you can say they promote or defeat survival from a psychological or
sociological point of view, but again, I don't believe this is the forum
for that (try alt.support.xx or alt.racist or alt.UFO's or something).
I know - I know - no one is making me read the stuff, but it's
like that 'learned helplessness' thing - you just start to give up, "I'll
never see anything worthwhile on this list - why keep going back to
it?" Is that really in the interest of the group at large? I don't
think so.
Yeah, I also know - if you don't like the threads you see, start
another one.... I suppose so, but I still believe a moderator would be a
great help in making the newsgroup more USEFUL to all involved. I suggest
you look over at rec.guns as an example - he hardly squashes anything, and
he lets you know when you're off topic - very fair, IMO.
my rapidly devaluing $.02
-Nadir
--
na...@netcom.com = Nadir A. El Farra in Los Angeles
"Let us rise up tonight with a greater readiness. Let us stand with
greater determination. And let us move in these powerful days, these
days of challenge, to make America what it ought to be."Dr. MLK, Jr.
***** DON'T TREAD ON ME *****
Mike Chapman
Nadir A. El Farra <na...@netcom.com> wrote:
>Hi everyone,
> I really hate to say this, but I'm changing my mind on the
>moderator issue - I've seen enough non-survivalism posts lately to do the
>trick. I'm sorry, but white supremacy, ET's, and militias are all well
>and good as points to discuss (hey - free speech, right?), but in terms of
>subject matter they can't objectively be considered survial-oriented. Oh
>sure, you can say they promote or defeat survival from a psychological or
>sociological point of view, but again, I don't believe this is the forum
>for that (try alt.support.xx or alt.racist or alt.UFO's or something).
If we get enough votes there will be a militia group to direct
militia traffic to.
(vote YES on misc.activism.militia - send mail to jam...@dialogic.com
with I vote YES on misc.activism.militia in the body).
> I know - I know - no one is making me read the stuff, but it's
>like that 'learned helplessness' thing - you just start to give up, "I'll
>never see anything worthwhile on this list - why keep going back to
>it?" Is that really in the interest of the group at large? I don't
>think so.
> Yeah, I also know - if you don't like the threads you see, start
>another one.... I suppose so, but I still believe a moderator would be a
>great help in making the newsgroup more USEFUL to all involved. I suggest
>you look over at rec.guns as an example - he hardly squashes anything, and
>he lets you know when you're off topic - very fair, IMO.
A moderator would make sense for misc.survivalism. There's far
too much noise.
--
Citizen Chapman, Esq.
Sic Semper Tyrannis Live Free or Die! Don't tread on me!
Bill Seward
>
<snip, art is about the need for a moderator>
Myself, I'm not sorry to say that moderation of the group is needed. I've
noticed that in the last few months the signal to noise ratio has really
went to hell. Also, I've noticed that a number of our better informed
and more eloquent posters have stopped posting.
A lot of people feel that with the huge influx of folks to the net, that
the days of the unmoderated newsgroup may be numbered. I figure the
seriouly special topic groups will do fine. But many, like this one,
could benefit from a little assistance.
-----------------------------------------------------
Bill Seward
w...@infi.net
I speak for myself. No one else will.
Henry McDaniel
>Hi everyone,
> I really hate to say this, but I'm changing my mind on the
>moderator issue - I've seen enough non-survivalism posts lately to do the
>trick. I'm sorry, but white supremacy, ET's, and militias are all well
>and good as points to discuss (hey - free speech, right?), but in terms of
>subject matter they can't objectively be considered survial-oriented. Oh
>sure, you can say they promote or defeat survival from a psychological or
>sociological point of view, but again, I don't believe this is the forum
>for that (try alt.support.xx or alt.racist or alt.UFO's or something).
"they can't objectively considered survival-oriented"
Where is this objective test to measure the degree to which a post
is survival oriented?
I agree racist stuff has no productive place here (or on most of
USENET.) But I cannot recall a militia oriented post here which
was made from an explicit or implied racist perspective (or even a
hidden one in the case of my own militia related post.)
We found out on this NG long ago that one person's deffinition of
survival is another person's joke. For instance the guy living
in Alaska doesn't generally need to hear someone in Florida opining
about how to keep one's hands warm when the temperature is in the
50's. And someone like myself, living in the NW doesn't really
need someone to tell them about floods & woodlands to the same
degree as the guy in Arizona.
Rick De Castro
>From: mcda...@u.washington.edu (Henry McDaniel)
>Subject: Re: We need a moderator folks...
>Date: 10 Mar 1995 15:19:13 GMT
I think we should hold off any decisions about a moderator until the votes are
in for the milita group - almost all of the noise here (with the exception of
the spam queen, frankenchrist) is about militias or militia related stuff, we
can filter out the rest.
If the milita group doesn't pass, we may want to try it.
=======================================================================
Rick N6RCX Warning! I am a trained professional.
deca...@netcom.com No, REALLY. Don't try this at home -
ri...@primenet.com It could get ugly.
Richard A. De Castro MA EMT-A ATP
Member of the US Militia for over 20 years =DON'T TREAD ON ME=
=======================================================================
ch...@marsh.com
> Hi everyone,
> I really hate to say this, but I'm changing my mind on the
> moderator issue - I've seen enough non-survivalism posts lately to do the
> trick.
A lot of the clueless screen spooge we have been seeing lately does
indicate that many of the people here are not knowledgeable to discuss
the matters we started out to talk about, or even modest enough to listen
as others do. It is distressing. But it does not, to my mind, build a
case for moderation. "Moderated newsgroup" is an oxymoron. The chance
that any moderator's opinions of what is appropriate will exactly
coincide with my opinion of what is news are remote.
A moderator does the same thing as a bouncer in a bar, he benignly
oversees the regulars and the in-control and ejects the fools. Now, what
are the chances of someone walking into a moderated newsgroup, or a
bouncered bar, standing up on a table and saying something unusual,
controversial, or really *new*? People have moderators, or bouncers,
because they do not want to face the new, the challenging or the weird in
their favorite ng's, or watering holes.
I have noted a drift to one-note arglebargle with everyone pretty much
agreed, in moderated newsgroups, and I don't like it. People who are
bothered by some of the nuts who show up here can:
1. Vote for new groups that more closely match the concerns of the
off-topic posters,
2. Use the killfile feature (I haven't heard a peep out of Frankenfurter
since shortly after the group started),
3. Protest to the posters and their sysops,
4. Engage the offender in a public conversation; I noted some time ago a
'survival author' showing up here who proved, as it were, all thumbs in
defending his information. That was a useful datum in itself.
The problem is the offenders don't really understand politeness or the
newsgroup concept, don't see what is valuable in people voluntarily
joining a thread to have a talk on matters of mutual interest. No, they
have to butt in and wax garrulous. It's too bad they are uncivil, but
moderation seems to be returning the same in kind. Learn to press ^K. Let
the idea sink in slowly to those who post without reading, or who know it
all too well to listen a while before commenting ... talk silly, no one
listens.
Let us on m.s set an example of how a newsgroup can organically moderate
itself. Hey, if you can't survive a little off-the-wall or
off-the-barn-floor bandwidth waste, how much of a survivor are you?
:) Vote no on moderation of m.s, YES on creation of t.a.m,
Chuck.
--
.sig: ****Chuck Marsh, database consultant, VB and SQL client/server****
"Welcome to Hell, here's your accordion."
URL: gopher://gopher.lm.com, neat place, see my ad in the Shopping Plaza.
Or, gopher gopher.lm.com. Of course.
Travis Corcoran
In article <D56w1...@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> mi...@chimera.med.Virginia.EDU (Mike Chapman) writes:
> Newsgroups: misc.survivalism
> From: mi...@chimera.med.Virginia.EDU (Mike Chapman)
> Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 20:10:44 GMT
>
> In article <nadirD5...@netcom.com>,
> Nadir A. El Farra <na...@netcom.com> wrote:
> >Hi everyone,
> > I really hate to say this, but I'm changing my mind on the
> >moderator issue - I've seen enough non-survivalism posts lately to do the
> >trick.
>
> If we get enough votes there will be a militia group to direct
> militia traffic to.
Even if you don't get enough votes, m.s is not where the militia
traffic belongs. Start a mailing list; its easy enough.
> A moderator would make sense for misc.survivalism. There's far
> too much noise.
And every militia post is part of the noise.
--
TJIC (Travis J.I. Corcoran) TJ...@icd.teradyne.com
Member NRA, GOAL
opinions(TJIC) != opinions(employer(TJIC))
"Buy a rifle, encrypt your data, and wait for the Revolution!"
Vampire
: In article <D56w1...@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> mi...@chimera.med.Virginia.EDU (Mike Chapman) writes:
: > Newsgroups: misc.survivalism
: > From: mi...@chimera.med.Virginia.EDU (Mike Chapman)
: > Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 20:10:44 GMT
: >
: > In article <nadirD5...@netcom.com>,
: > Nadir A. El Farra <na...@netcom.com> wrote:
(much wisdom deleted to save space)
Will a militia newsgroup get the Kurt Saxon novels out of m.s.?
Please?
Richard Meyers
>> Newsgroups: misc.survivalism
>> From: mi...@chimera.med.Virginia.EDU (Mike Chapman)
>> Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 20:10:44 GMT
>>
>> In article <nadirD5...@netcom.com>,
>> Nadir A. El Farra <na...@netcom.com> wrote:
>> >Hi everyone,
>> > I really hate to say this, but I'm changing my mind on the
>> >moderator issue - I've seen enough non-survivalism posts lately to do the
>> >trick.
[snip]
>> A moderator would make sense for misc.survivalism. There's far
>> too much noise.
I also agree with the idea of moderation. I do not like the idea of a
single moderator however. At the vert least, let's adopt a scheme like
that used by other News Groups: Multiple moderators who "vote" about
submissions. One group I belong to has four moderators. Two yes votes
gets you article posted. Two no votes shoots it down.
The role of moderator can only be accomplished when there is a well-defined
purpose or theme for the group. As a group "survivalists" tend to be
"hearty individualists". Most however, are smart enough to appreciate
the value of good friends and neighbors. Especially in a crunch. Does
the militia belong on this group? I think it does, at least until it has
one of its own. My survival may well depend on having contact with such as
these.
At the very least, we share an interest in the issues of communication,
logistics, equipment, and training. Do we want to use this group as a
clearinghouse for contact and mustering information? I think not. Let's
keep on topic, but not so much so that we deprive ourselves of useful
information or alienate our brothers and sisters in Freedom.
Richard Meyers
ben_farmer
btw does anybody have any info on the requirements
for a water well that can be adapted with a hand
pump and make it work properly ?
Ben
Patton M Turner
Most any well can be used with a hand pump. Real shallow wells can use a
surface mounted pump, deep wells use a cylinder at the bottom of the
well, with a plunger rod to the top. You can also use a bucket made from
pipe a little smaller then the casing diameter with a flap valve in the
bottom.
Pat