Other Designers china supplier (http://www.brandtrade10.com)

[shoesbuy]

Other Designers china supplier (http://www.brandtrade10.com)

[Graham.]

"shoesbuy" <zhangq...@yahoo.cn> wrote in message news:caf16fac-0fd2-4446...@u34g2000yqu.googlegroups.com...

> Other Designers china supplier (http://www.brandtrade10.com)

So much for moderated Usenet!

How did that get through anyway?

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

[Graham Drabble]

On 13 Apr 2010 "Graham." <m...@privacy.net> wrote in
news:hq2f2n$vrp$1...@news.eternal-september.org:

>
> "shoesbuy" <zhangq...@yahoo.cn> wrote in message
> news:caf16fac-0fd2-4446...@u34g2000yqu.googlegroups.
> com...
>> Other Designers china supplier (http://www.brandtrade10.com)
>
> So much for moderated Usenet!
>
> How did that get through anyway?

The group is currently run through a modbot that posts without any
human intervention. This was done so that there could be a quick
resupmtion of the group so that it could be seen if there was a demand
to keep the group. In the long term I would expect the group to want to
mvoe to a more traditional moderation system.

Currently the modbot:

1) Checks the article is valid
2) Checks that the article is not a binary
3) Checks the article against a spam filter

Provided it passes all three of those it is passed. In this case the
spam filter did not detect that as spam (it catches 5-10 posts / day).

--
Graham Drabble
http://www.drabble.me.uk/

[Henry Goodman]

"Graham Drabble" <usen...@drabble.me.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns9D59CFFECEDB3gr...@drabble.me.uk...

Since this group restarted in February there have been only 3 posts which I
would have rejected if I had been actively moderating.

--
Henry Goodman
henry dot goodman at virgin dot net

[lee]

On Apr 13, 9:22 pm, "Graham." <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> X-No-Archive: Yes

>
> > The group is currently run through a modbot that posts without any
> > human intervention. This was done so that there could be a quick
> > resupmtion of the group so that it could be seen if there was a demand
> > to keep the group. In the long term I would expect the group to want to
> > mvoe to a more traditional moderation system.
>
> > Currently the modbot:
>
> > 1) Checks the article is valid
> > 2) Checks that the article is not a binary
> > 3) Checks the article against a spam filter
>
> > Provided it passes all three of those it is passed. In this case the
> > spam filter did not detect that as spam (it catches 5-10 posts / day).
>

> Actually I am surprised that only those criteria are applied based on the
> groups freedom, thus far, from the Shoah deniers and those with odd definitions of the "Z" word.
>
> --
> Graham.
>
> %Profound_observation%

Do you mind if I ask (a potentially embarrassing question, with an
obvious answer) what the "Z" word is?