Nuxx:0f9cf720-d195-41e3-9a11-b0644f3268f9@j4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!j4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <0f9cf720-d195-41e3-9a11-b0644f3268f9@j4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling,uk.rec.driving,uk.transport Subject: Re: Delete uk.rec.cycling.moderated? Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 00:16:01 -0700 (PDT) References:  <89mdthF9nmU4@mid.individual.net> Lines: 27 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.71.49.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1278659770 3973 127.0.0.1 (9 Jul 2010 07:16:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 07:16:10 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: j4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.6) Gecko/20100625 Firefox/3.6.6 GTB7.1 GTBA,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 2744 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:773356

On Jul 8, 5:49 pm, Adrian  wrote: > JMS  gurgled happily, sounding much like they > were saying: > > AFAIC, the only people to whom the existence of uk.rec.cycling.moderated > matters are those who post there. If people post there, then there's no > reason to delete it. If people don't like the way it's run, then they > don't have to post there.

I disagree. The group is part of the uk.* hierarchy; therefore it has to abide by certain rules, one of which is that it should be run impartially and not as a private club. The group was created under false pretences with the express intention of "getting round" those rules. It's not on. By "taking up" the uk.rec.cycling.moderated slot these atypical nutjob cyclists are preventing other, more enlightened people who are normal cyclists (as opposed to car-hating extremists) from making an honest effort to run a properly open moderated newsgroup about cycling in the UK.

If these people want a private club, they must run it as a forum or private newsgroup. If they want to have a uk.* newsgroup, they must run it without the obvious intention of excluding certain posters/ opinions/truths that they don't like (because "they", the moderators, all seem to have the same opinions on cycle helmets etc...what a coincidence, eh?) They can't have a private club *and* run it as a uk.* newsgroup, no matter how popular some people perceive it to be: they need to choose and stop being so arrogant.