«

Doesn't newgroup moderation need a check placed on it to ensure that it doesn't
become censorship? Instead of dropping posts, shouldn't they just be retitled to allow
group readers the choice of whether to read or filter the moderated posts? The other
possibility is to create another/other groups that have the moderated posts put in them
(by moderators or posters): comp.moderatedposts, for example.

Ted

Ted wrote:
> Doesn't newgroup moderation need a check placed on it to ensure that it doesn't
> become censorship?

There is : unmoderated groups. Censorship deletes the message,
moderation
only determines which messages can go where.

> Instead of dropping posts, shouldn't they just be retitled to allow
> group readers the choice of whether to read or filter the moderated posts? The other
> possibility is to create another/other groups that have the moderated posts put in them
> (by moderators or posters): comp.moderatedposts, for example.

Why do you want to put all moderated articles in one group? I'd like to
keep the
moderated C++ posts in clc++m. Much easier. As to rejected messages,
I'd say
the author (and not all possible readers) should decide what the next
best thing
is - rewrite, repost to another (moderated) group where it's on-topic,
or simply
forget it.

HTH,
Michiel Salters

* :
> Ted wrote:
>> Doesn't newgroup moderation need a check placed on it to ensure that it doesn't
>> become censorship?
>
> There is : unmoderated groups. Censorship deletes the message,
> moderation
> only determines which messages can go where.
>
>> Instead of dropping posts, shouldn't they just be retitled to allow
>> group readers the choice of whether to read or filter the moderated posts? The other
>> possibility is to create another/other groups that have the moderated posts put in them
>> (by moderators or posters): comp.moderatedposts, for example.
>
> Why do you want to put all moderated articles in one group? I'd like to
> keep the
> moderated C++ posts in clc++m. Much easier. As to rejected messages,
> I'd say
> the author (and not all possible readers) should decide what the next
> best thing
> is - rewrite, repost to another (moderated) group where it's on-topic,
> or simply
> forget it.

Some rejections are for off-topicality, some are for "heat", and some
are like the one below, where my reply to you was rejected:

Message-ID: <>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c++.moderated
From: "Alf P. Steinbach" <>
Subject: Re: Iteration with unsigned integral type
Organization: unknown
References: < .com>
<>
<dvpuj1$jpj$>
<>
< .com>
X-Original-Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:55:36 +0100
X-Submission-Address: c++-

{ It's a witty reply , but I'm afraid it doesn't actually add
anything technical to the tread. -mod }

* :
> > Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
> > if you want to enumerate all bit patterns that can occur for a
>> >> size_t, or for any integral type T, in a single loop, then you
>> >> need some
>> >> loop state in addition to a T, whether T is int or char or size_t
>> >> or...
> >
> > No, you dont:
> >
> > unsigned int i = 0;
> > do {
> > foo(i);
> > } while (0 != ++i);
> >
> > The only case in which you need additional loop state is when you
> > use a
> > test-first
> > loop (as that must support lengths [0..N] inclusive, i.e. N+1 states)

Oink.

(That means, I sit corrected.)

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

<> wrote in message news: oups.com...
>
> Ted wrote:
>> Doesn't newgroup moderation need a check placed on it to ensure that it doesn't
>> become censorship?
>
> There is : unmoderated groups. Censorship deletes the message,
> moderation
> only determines which messages can go where.
>
>> Instead of dropping posts, shouldn't they just be retitled to allow
>> group readers the choice of whether to read or filter the moderated posts? The other
>> possibility is to create another/other groups that have the moderated posts put in them
>> (by moderators or posters): comp.moderatedposts, for example.
>
> Why do you want to put all moderated articles in one group? I'd like to
> keep the
> moderated C++ posts in clc++m. Much easier.

I offered it as a SECOND option.

> As to rejected messages,

Oh, I was using "moderated messages" as rejected ones.

> I'd say
> the author (and not all possible readers) should decide what the next
> best thing
> is - rewrite, repost to another (moderated) group where it's on-topic,
> or simply
> forget it.

The problem I have with that is that it becomes too easy for "moderators"
to abuse their positions. The check on "moderation" is to see what is being
moderated-out.

Ted

Ted wrote:

> Doesn't newgroup moderation need a check placed on it to ensure that
> it doesn't become censorship?


This is pretty dopey. If you don't like the moderation policies of a
moderated newsgroup or forum, don't use it. There are certainly no
shortage non-moderated newsgroups on various topics.


> Instead of dropping posts, shouldn't they just be retitled
> to allow group readers the choice of whether to
> read or filter the moderated posts?

I don't think moderators should alter posts in any way. Accept or
reject are the only sensible avenues.

> The other possibility is to
> create another/other groups that have the moderated posts put in them
> (by moderators or posters): comp.moderatedposts, for example.

What, all posts from EVERY moderated comp newsgroup on usenet? All
mixed together in a bucket, eggs on top, don't skimp on the pate? Silly.


You don't really seem to have much of an idea. What happened, get some
posts canned and now you're all in a huff about it? Grow up, that's my
advice. Moderating a newsgroup is about the most thankless task I can
imagine on usenet, I wouldn't touch that job with 1024 foot pole. If
you don't like clc++m, just post here. Take your chances.



Brian

Ted wrote:

> The problem I have with that is that it becomes too easy for "moderators"
> to abuse their positions. The check on "moderation" is to see what is being
> moderated-out.

What did you "post" that got moderated out ?

regards
Andy Little

"Default User" <> wrote in message news:...
> Ted wrote:
>
>> Doesn't newgroup moderation need a check placed on it to ensure that
>> it doesn't become censorship?
>
>
> This is pretty dopey. If you don't like the moderation policies of a
> moderated newsgroup or forum, don't use it. There are certainly no
> shortage non-moderated newsgroups on various topics.
>
>
>> Instead of dropping posts, shouldn't they just be retitled
>> to allow group readers the choice of whether to
>> read or filter the moderated posts?
>
> I don't think moderators should alter posts in any way. Accept or
> reject are the only sensible avenues.

I don't see any problem with doing something like:

Original title: C++ Scandal?!
Moderated title: [Moderated] C++ Scandal?!

A better solution than a separate group I think. The separate group would
only be required to allow posters their 5th amendment rights when the
"moderators" were actually suppressing thoughts by not allowing posts
within a group. Seeing all rejected/moderated posts would give more
insight as to what the group is. Not being allowed to see those posts is
cause for suspicion.

>> The other possibility is to
>> create another/other groups that have the moderated posts put in them
>> (by moderators or posters): comp.moderatedposts, for example.
>
> What, all posts from EVERY moderated comp newsgroup on usenet? All
> mixed together in a bucket, eggs on top, don't skimp on the pate? Silly.

Obviously I didn't think one group for all moderated posts was doable either:
that's why I implied at some smaller granularity (comp.moderatedposts).

> You don't really seem to have much of an idea.

Your entitled to your opinion. I think it's a valid and topical issue in general
and not just because I've been "moderated". Unchecked moderation has
potential undesireable aspects that the unnitiated can fall prey to.

> What happened, get some
> posts canned and now you're all in a huff about it?

I don't "get in a huff". But it's certainly something that has me saying "hmm.."
at this point.

> Grow up, that's my
> advice.

You should "grow up" by not trying to suppress dialog in threads where YOU
don't wish to discuss. Examine your own behavior above.

> Moderating a newsgroup is about the most thankless task I can
> imagine on usenet, I wouldn't touch that job with 1024 foot pole. If
> you don't like clc++m, just post here. Take your chances.

Ted

<> wrote in message news: oups.com...
> Ted wrote:
>
>> The problem I have with that is that it becomes too easy for "moderators"
>> to abuse their positions. The check on "moderation" is to see what is being
>> moderated-out.
>
> What did you "post" that got moderated out ?

10 or so replies in the "Overuse of Templates" thread.

Ted

Ted wrote:
> <> wrote in message news: oups.com...
> > Ted wrote:
> >
> >> The problem I have with that is that it becomes too easy for "moderators"
> >> to abuse their positions. The check on "moderation" is to see what is being
> >> moderated-out.
> >
> > What did you "post" that got moderated out ?
>
> 10 or so replies in the "Overuse of Templates" thread.

Well, if they are anything like the troll **** you're spewing here then
it is not at all surprising that it is moderated out. People go to
moderated groups to avoid trollish boobs so the moderators are just
doing their part. If you want to troll you are now in the right
place...this group is unmoderated and feeds its trolls quite well.

Have fun

"Noah Roberts" <> wrote in message news: oups.com...
>
> Ted wrote:
>> <> wrote in message news: oups.com...
>> > Ted wrote:
>> >
>> >> The problem I have with that is that it becomes too easy for "moderators"
>> >> to abuse their positions. The check on "moderation" is to see what is being
>> >> moderated-out.
>> >
>> > What did you "post" that got moderated out ?
>>
>> 10 or so replies in the "Overuse of Templates" thread.
>
> Well, if they are anything like the troll **** you're spewing here

Try listening sometime. You may learn something beyond tinker toy assembly
that way.

(I have little patience for juvenille antics).

Ted