Server for sci.math.moderated
William Elliot
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
>Would you tell us about servers for newsgroups?
A news server shares posts with its peers. That is
what makes Usenet Usenet.
I presume you're talking about a host for a moderation
team. That's a different kettle of fish.
The minimum would be a submission address which would
receive posts by e-mail. The person who collects the
mail would then add an approved header for those
posts that were approved and forward them to a friendly
news server (known, I think, as "injecting" them into
the news server).
Next up the scale is an account that would let you
run some kind of moderation software. The software
checks the incoming mail and provides some method
for one or more moderators to make a decision about
the posts. It then takes over the work of adding
the approved header and injecting the post into
a friendly news server.
Paul Schleck has set up perhaps half a dozen
sites for moderated groups. You can get the
necessary kind of account at Panix for $100
per year.
Marty
--
Co-chair of the Big-8 Management Board (B8MB) <http://www.big-8.org>
Unless otherwise indicated, I speak for myself, not for the Board.
William Elliot
> <ma...@rdrop.remove.com> wrote in
>> Would you tell us about servers for newsgroups?
>
>
> The minimum would be a submission address which would
> receive posts by e-mail. The person who collects the
> mail would then add an approved header for those
> posts that were approved and forward them to a friendly
> news server (known, I think, as "injecting" them into
> the news server).
Collecting posts is part of the server?
> Next up the scale is an account that would let you
> run some kind of moderation software.
Would that require more that an ordinary web account?
> The software
> checks the incoming mail and provides some method
> for one or more moderators to make a decision about
> the posts. It then takes over the work of adding
> the approved header and injecting the post into
> a friendly news server.
>
So the moderation software includes a server and a collector?
What do you think of STUMP?
> Paul Schleck has set up perhaps half a dozen
> sites for moderated groups. You can get the
> necessary kind of account at Panix for $100
> per year.
>
Ouch.
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
>> The minimum would be a submission address which would
>> receive posts by e-mail. The person who collects the
>> mail would then add an approved header for those
>> posts that were approved and forward them to a friendly
>> news server (known, I think, as "injecting" them into
>> the news server).
>Collecting posts is part of the server?
Yes.
See this FAQ for details:
<http://www.big-8.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=faqs:moderation#how_does_moderation_work>
>> Next up the scale is an account that would let you
>> run some kind of moderation software.
>Would that require more that an ordinary web account?
Depends on the terms of service for the web account.
You need to be able to set up some aliases for e-mail
(pretty routine).
You need to be able to run a cron job (less routine,
but often available by request).
You need to be able to install some scripts (mostly
Perl???).
>> The software
>> checks the incoming mail and provides some method
>> for one or more moderators to make a decision about
>> the posts. It then takes over the work of adding
>> the approved header and injecting the post into
>> a friendly news server.
>So the moderation software includes a server and a collector?
Moderation software receives the posts as incoming e-mail, provides
a method of letting moderators pass juddgment on the posts, and
then provides a method for injecting approved posts into a
news server.
>What do you think of STUMP?
I've used the free version with one group since 1998.
Paul Schleck installed WEBSTUMP on a panix account for
the board in the last year or so. Both work.
>> Paul Schleck has set up perhaps half a dozen
>> sites for moderated groups. You can get the
>> necessary kind of account at Panix for $100
>> per year.
>Ouch.
Some of you may already have personal websites that
can run STUMP. You could use the panix account for
more than just moderating the newsgroup ...
Kathy Morgan
> Would you tell us about servers for newsgroups?
Any server at which you have an account can be used for injecting
moderation posts, as long as the server admin knows that you are the
moderators for the group. Some servers will let anyone inject approved
posts, but those posts don't propagate to most other servers.
--
Kathy
William Elliot
>
>>> The minimum would be a submission address which would receive posts by
>>> e-mail. The person who collects the mail would then add an approved
>>> header for those posts that were approved and forward them to a
>
>> Collecting posts is part of the server?
>
> <http://www.big-8.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=faqs:moderation#how_does_moderation_work>
>
> (pretty routine).
>
usenet relay to send him the newsgroup's posts which he approves or
rejects and then injects into the newsgroup
> You need to be able to run a cron job (less routine,
> but often available by request).
What's a cron job and what do it do?
Is it run on the moderators computer.
> You need to be able to install some scripts (mostly Perl???).
>
Does the moderator need a shell account or will his account suffice?
>>> The software checks the incoming mail and provides some method for one
>>> or more moderators to make a decision about the posts. It then takes
>>> over the work of adding the approved header and injecting the post
>>> into a friendly news server.
>
>> So the moderation software includes a server and a collector?
>
> Moderation software receives the posts as incoming e-mail, provides
> a method of letting moderators pass juddgment on the posts, and
> then provides a method for injecting approved posts into a
> news server.
Is this software run locally on the moderators' computer?
Kathy Morgan
William Elliot <ma...@rdrop.remove.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2009, Martin X. Moleski, SJ wrote:
> >
> Each moderator needs to have a web server that allows an alias for the
> usenet relay to send him the newsgroup's posts which he approves or
> rejects and then injects into the newsgroup
No. Each moderator needs to be able to receive the newsgroup
submissions, approve or reject them, and if a message is approved inject
it into the group. A web server may be involved, but does not have to
be, and certainly each moderator doesn't need to have a web server.
There are a couple of web moderation programs which use a single web
server to provide access to submissions to all moderators. There are
also moderation programs which do not involv e any web access.
> > You need to be able to run a cron job (less routine,
> > but often available by request).
>
> What's a cron job and what do it do?
> Is it run on the moderators computer.
I disagree with Marty that you need to be able to run a cron job. That
may be required by some moderation software, but certainly not by all.
A cron job is a task performed on a specified time interval by cron, a
Unix/Linux program.
> > You need to be able to install some scripts (mostly Perl???).
> >
> Does the moderator need a shell account or will his account suffice?
Again, some moderation schemes/programs require installation of scripts,
but not all.
> > Moderation software receives the posts as incoming e-mail, provides
> > a method of letting moderators pass juddgment on the posts, and
> > then provides a method for injecting approved posts into a
> > news server.
>
> Is this software run locally on the moderators' computer?
That depends on what software you are using.
news.groups.proposals is for discussion of adding or removing newsgroups
from the Big 8. That includes discussion of proposed moderation
policies for proposed new groups. Discussion of the nuts and bolts and
mechanics of newsgroup moderation are off topic here, and would be
better discussed in news.admin.moderation (link
<news:news.admin.moderation>).
news.admin.moderation is a moderated newsgroup for precisely this type
of discussion. It has been extremely low traffic, but hopefully people
interested in the topic are still monitoring the group and may be able
to provide more assistance than you're likely to find here in
news.groups.proposals. For that reason I have set followups to go
there.
--
Kathy, co-chair of B8MB but speaking just for myself.
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
>Each moderator needs to have a web server that allows an alias for the
>usenet relay to send him the newsgroup's posts which he approves or
>rejects and then injects into the newsgroup?
No.
Only one web server is "required" (if you're using
the web-server model of moderation).
That server either makes new posts available through
a web page or else e-mails new posts to one or more
moderators for moderation.
>> You need to be able to run a cron job (less routine,
>> but often available by request).
>What's a cron job and what do it do?
Cron is a resource provided by *nix operating systems
(unix, linux). It is a daemon (resident piece of
software) that runs other scripts (other pieces of
software) on a chronological timetable.
So, for example, you can set up a cron job to peek
at your mailbox once a minute to see if there are any
new e-mails containing posts that need moderation.
If there are, then the script can run the other
scripts necessary to make the new e-mails available
for the moderator(s) to moderate.
>Is it run on the moderators computer?
It is run by the computer that is hosting the moderation
software.
>> You need to be able to install some scripts (mostly Perl???).
>Does the moderator need a shell account or will his account suffice?
All of the installations of Stump with which I am familiar
use shell accounts. It may be possible for a clever person
to install and maintain the software on a regular account.
I have not tried it myself.
>>>> The software checks the incoming mail and provides some method for one
>>>> or more moderators to make a decision about the posts. It then takes
>>>> over the work of adding the approved header and injecting the post
>>>> into a friendly news server.
>>> So the moderation software includes a server and a collector?
The moderation software resides on a server.
It has a method for collecting posts and a method for
making them available to the moderator(s).
>> Moderation software receives the posts as incoming e-mail, provides
>> a method of letting moderators pass juddgment on the posts, and
>> then provides a method for injecting approved posts into a
>> news server.
>Is this software run locally on the moderators' computer?
It probably could be. I'm not personally willing to keep
a computer running 24x7x365, so I've never set one up to
act as a host for moderation software. I also don't have
a fixed IP address for my computers, so I couldn't correlate
any of them with a domain; and I doubt that my ISP
(Canisius College) would provide me with the DNS service to
do so.
I can imagine a computer that could log in and download
mail from an account elsewhere, then process it. I don't
know whether any scripts have been written to accomodate
that method of moderation.
Kathy Morgan
DMod, a free moderation software, does exactly that. Each moderator
would need to install DMod (or the equivalent) on his/her own computer.
When s/he is ready to moderate messages, s/he uses DMod to collect the
email then reject or approve them and delete them from the machine.
DMod can be used to add special headers, delete unwanted email headers,
and you can manually modify the headers or body. (Note to OP: Modifying
the body is generally denigrated; most of us feel the message should
either be rejected or approved as-is.)
DMod advantages: it's free and it can do the job.
DMod disadvantages: DMod is only available for Windows. It must be
installed on each moderator's personal computer. It may be slow,
removing extra email headers that you'd prefer not to have in the posted
message. (eg., all those spam headers that so many mail servers now
insert.)
I used DMod successfully for a number of years for one group I
moderated. It was something of a nuisance for me, since I use a Mac and
had to fire up an emulator each time I used it, but those of you using
Windows would not have that drawback.
--
Kathy, speaking only for myself
Kathy Morgan
> Someone should try to convince cPanel to include Stump.
I'm not familiar with cPanel. What is it?
--
Kathy
William Elliot
> On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 11:03:05 CST, William Elliot <ma...@rdrop.remove.com> wrote in <2009100601...@agora.rdrop.com>:
>
>> Each moderator needs to have a web server that allows an alias for the
>> usenet relay to send him the newsgroup's posts which he approves or
>> rejects and then injects into the newsgroup?
>
> No.
>
> Only one web server is "required" (if you're using
> the web-server model of moderation).
>
What other models are there? Is there on where the moderators can
each collect and inject the new posts using moderation software?
William Elliot
> On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 11:03:05 CST, William Elliot <ma...@rdrop.remove.com> wrote in <2009100601...@agora.rdrop.com>:
>
>> Each moderator needs to have a web server that allows an alias for the
>> usenet relay to send him the newsgroup's posts which he approves or
>> rejects and then injects into the newsgroup?
>
Perhaps I should have used "internet server".
> No.
>
> Only one web server is "required" (if you're using
> the web-server model of moderation).
>
Is a web server the same as an internet server?
> That server either makes new posts available through
> a web page or else e-mails new posts to one or more
> moderators for moderation.
>
What's needed for the server?
University of Austin refused to provide the needed resources because
the technician was concerned that they'd be come a hacking target.
Is the server another relay that collects the group's posts
from the usenet relay and emails them to the moderators?
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
>>> Each moderator needs to have a web server that allows an alias for the
>>> usenet relay to send him the newsgroup's posts which he approves or
>>> rejects and then injects into the newsgroup?
>Perhaps I should have used "internet server".
OK. We can call it that, if you'd like.
>> Only one web server is "required" (if you're using
>> the web-server model of moderation).
>Is a web server the same as an internet server?
It's close enough for our purposes.
>> That server either makes new posts available through
>> a web page or else e-mails new posts to one or more
>> moderators for moderation.
>What's needed for the server?
At a bare minimum, the ability to receive e-mails
relayed from the news server to the moderation
submission address.
>University of Austin refused to provide the needed resources because
>the technician was concerned that they'd become a hacking target.
His fears are not entirely ungrounded. Such things
have happened.
>Is the server another relay that collects the group's posts
>from the usenet relay and emails them to the moderators?
That is one model of moderation. That is one way
to set up STUMP.
Another is that the server just provides a mail box
that the moderators can visit at their leisure, retrieve
the posts that have been relayed, then manually submit
to a news server with the "approved" header added.
I think this is how DMOD works (apparently on Windows
machines only).
Another model is that the server has scripts that
retrieve the mail from the mailbox and puts up a
web page by means of which a visiting mod can make
a decision about a post. One version of this is
WebSTUMP.
At the bottom of page indicated below, you will find
seven (7) links to moderation software. As Kathy pointed
out yesterday, DMOD works differently from STUMP;
and STUMP may be set up two different ways (e-mailing
the posts to the moderator(s) or presenting them
on a web page).
<http://www.big-8.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=faqs:moderation#how_does_moderation_work>
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
>> Only one web server is "required" (if you're using
>> the web-server model of moderation).
>What other models are there? Is there on where the moderators can
>each collect and inject the new posts using moderation software?
There are seven moderaton schemes listed at the bottom of
this page:
<http://www.big-8.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=faqs:moderation#how_does_moderation_work>
Each of the seven links works. I just tested them.
If you read the seven pages, you may get some idea of
what kinds of choices are available for receiving
the e-mailed posts from news servers and acting on
them.
modbot and Robomod do not have distributed source
code (that I know of, anyway). They are on the
list for the sake of completeness. Both are in
use by some moderated newsgroups.
Steve Bonine
> What other models are there? Is there on where the moderators can
> each collect and inject the new posts using moderation software?
The concept is really pretty simple.
All the submissions for a moderated newsgroup are sent to an email
address. Somewhere there must be a server to support this email
address. There's nothing special about it; it's an email address just
like any other and the email it receives is no different from any other
email. You could use a standard email address supplied by an ISP, an
email address on a server that you operate yourself, or even one at
Google or Yahoo.
The interesting thing is what happens to the individual emails to turn
them into Usenet articles. That's what moderation software does.
There's the model used by webSTUMP. The mailbox lives on the server
that hosts the webSTUMP software. When a new email arrives -- a
potential new article for the moderated newsgroup -- the software does a
little processing on the incoming email and puts it into a queue that
moderators can access via the web. webSTUMP handles logging the
moderator in via a web interface, displays the queue entry, and the
moderator can either accept or reject it. If it's accepted, webSTUMP
sends it via NNTP to a news server and it begins its life in Usenet. If
it's rejected, webSTUMP sends a rejection message to the submitter. In
any case it removes the entry from its queue and shows the next
potential article to the moderator.
Another model is that instead of making the potential articles available
for view via a web interface, the software running on the server where
the mailbox lives simply forwards the incoming article to the
moderators, and they use software on their individual workstations to
convert it into a news article and inject it into Usenet (or they reject
it).
Or in the very simple case of one moderator, the moderator could have
the incoming articles sent to his own mailbox and use something, perhaps
script based, to convert the emails into Usenet articles.
My advice to the proponent team for sci.math.moderated is that you find
someone who can set up the moderation platform for you. It's too bad
that the Austin folks opted out, but you need to find a replacement.
I've seen at least one hard offer so far. It might cost you a few
bucks, but when spread out between several individuals it shouldn't be a
huge burden even for academic types. My personal preference is STUMP
running at a commercial provider because this provides a reliable
platform that can be easily accessed by a moderation team. If you find
an individual who agrees to host your moderation platform and that
individual decides they have better things to do with their time, the
newsgroup dies. At least with a commercial server provider and several
people on a moderation team you're not dependent on any single individual.
Dave Sill
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPanel
"cPanel is a unix based web hosting control panel that provides a
graphical interface and automation tools designed to simplify the
process of hosting a web site. cPanel utilizes a 3 tier structure that
provides functionality for administrators, resellers, and end-user
website owners to control the various aspects website and server
administration through a standard web browser."
-Dave
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
>>> Someone should try to convince cPanel to include Stump.
>> I'm not familiar with cPanel. What is it?
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPanel
>"cPanel is a unix based web hosting control panel that provides a
>graphical interface and automation tools designed to simplify the
>process of hosting a web site. cPanel utilizes a 3 tier structure that
>provides functionality for administrators, resellers, and end-user
>website owners to control the various aspects website and server
>administration through a standard web browser."
I'm sure the cPanel package is capable of installing moderation
software; the decision to configure it that way would be in the
hands of one's Internet Service Provider (ISP), I imagine.
Paul W. Schleck
Hash: SHA1
><http://www.big-8.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=faqs:moderation#how_does_moderation_work>
> Marty
Marty's reply reminds me to point out one more thing. There's at least
3 different versions of STUMP (possibly 4):
1. The STUMP initially modified by the rec.radio.amateur.moderated team
(RRAM) and shared with other Panix-hosted teams (including
news.announce.newgroups).
2. The STUMP modified by Jonathan Kamens (JIK), currently used on at
least news.groups.proposals.
3. Igor Chudov's original STUMP for download (last updated in 1999).
This is the version on which #1 and #2 forked off into similar, but
different, directions.
4. The STUMP used by Igor's ReadySTUMP paid hosting service is possibly
a copy further enhanced by him beyond version #3, as he may not have
been motivated to merge these enhancements back to his free version.
The RRAM enhancements were offered to Igor, including fixes to errors
and ambiguities in his documentation, but he has not yet incorporated
them into the free download version of STUMP.
Both #1 and #2 were similarly motivated and their authors (JIK and RRAM)
made similar enhancements, including:
- Converting from the obsolete Phil Zimmerman PGP 2.6.x to GnuPG. PGP
or GPG is used by STUMP to PGPMoose-sign (in an "X-Auth" header)
approved articles as well as check signatures on articles from users
who are configured in STUMP to have their articles automatically
rejected if the signature does not authenticate against their public
key in the STUMP keyring.
- CC'ing rejected messages, with rejection justification, to the
moderation team.
The JIK version also adds the following enhancements not in the RRAM
version:
- Highlighting, in red, the Newsgroups line on submitted articles that
are crossposted when viewed in WebSTUMP, to provide extra emphasis to
the reviewing moderator that the crossposted newsgroups should be
scrutinized for appropriateness.
- Adding a header to approved articles indicating which moderator
approved it.
The RRAM version also adds the following enhancements not in the JIK
version:
- Notifying, via E-mail, on article submissions and queue wait timeouts
(with interval times of 4 and 8 hours, respectively).
- Counting up approvals and rejections, and nominating for
whitelisting/blacklisting via E-mail notifications every N approvals
or rejections (where N is a configurable number).
- Trimming more mail headers in submissions that are not required for
news.
- Spell-checking submissions and warning in the WebSTUMP article review
window on high misspelling percentage (extending ispell's default
dictionary with a custom ispell dictionary of newsgroup-specific
terms). High misspelling percentage is added as another criteria to
hold up articles from white-listed users for manual review (in
addition to STUMP's existing checks).
- Automatically rejecting duplicate submissions (by calculating and
comparing MD5 digest checksums of article bodies)
- Automated reporting of SPAM to Spamcop and other abuse reporting
addresses (FDA, SEC, etc.), either automatically before (based on
high Spamassassin scores) or after (as a result of manual article
rejection) processing by STUMP.
- Automated checking of PGPMoose signatures of posted articles, and
alerting the moderators via E-mail when a forgery is detected.
Cancel-bots run by Tim Skirvin and others will send out ordinary
cancel messages and signed "NoCeM's" in response to these forgeries,
but the local checking both verifies that the signatures are being
properly generated, and prompts the moderation team to follow up with
manual complaints to originating sites of the forged articles.
The RRAM version of STUMP appears to be the most featureful (missing
only a couple of enhancements from the JIK version, which could probably
be incorporated into the RRAM version if a moderation team strongly
desired them). Free advice and hand-holding would be available from the
community of moderation teams at Panix to get it the RRAM version of
STUMP up and running, either in a Panix shell account ($100/year) or
another similar Unix-based shell account of your choice. Igor's free
download version of STUMP is the least cost, but would require the most
work to get it running and would be missing many useful enhancements
that are in the JIK and RRAM versions. Igor's ReadySTUMP hosting
service would require the least work to set up (Igor pretty much sets it
all up for you based on your needs on a server that he runs), but is the
most expensive ($360/year), is also missing many useful enhancements,
and is probably beyond your budget if $100/year is going to be a
challenge for your team.
Good luck with whatever you decide. If you decide to go with the RRAM
version, please contact me and I will put you in touch with the right
individuals.
- --
Paul W. Schleck
psch...@novia.net
http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/
Finger psch...@novia.net for PGP Public Key
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (SunOS)
iD8DBQFKzL596Pj0az779o4RAlf9AJ4sBmobHSrPBzuunFBh3wZ9tf1QXACfbXs5
j7L+HMt7Z4Rmdg4ac/PrFfI=
=nuXA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Kathy Morgan
> Kathy Morgan wrote:
> > William Bagwell <321n...@tds.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Someone should try to convince cPanel to include Stump.
> >
> > I'm not familiar with cPanel. What is it?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPanel
Thanks, Dave.
--
Kathy