Nuxx:4602f650-f572-4f24-845b-95e7897c7e98@p4g2000vba.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!p4g2000vba.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <4602f650-f572-4f24-845b-95e7897c7e98@p4g2000vba.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.config,uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: RFD: create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 13:36:18 -0700 (PDT) References:   <7jws7u53he.fsf@rapun.sel.cam.ac.uk>   Lines: 28 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.156.251.27 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1243974978 22542 127.0.0.1 (2 Jun 2009 20:36:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 20:36:18 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: p4g2000vba.googlegroups.com; posting-host=81.156.251.27; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.10) Gecko/2009042316 Firefox/3.0.10 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 2932 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.config:52552 uk.rec.cycling:4508

On Jun 2, 2:20=A0pm, Mike Clark  wrote: > In message  > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Ian Jackson  wrote: > > > In article <7jws7u53he....@rapun.sel.cam.ac.uk>, > > Matthew Vernon =A0 wrote: > > > Jonathan Schneider  writes: > > >> I'd rather not wait for one of a dozen people to approve my newsgrou= p > > >> postings even if one or two are or might be local. > > > > Many (most?) moderation systems have a mechanism for whitelisting > > > regular posters who do not flout the charter, meaning their posts do > > > not require any manual intervention before they reach the newsgroup. > > > Indeed. =A0We plan to use STUMP which has this feature. > > What is a pity about group moderation is the inability to easily see > what has been rejected. =A0In my view for all newsgroups that use > moderation there ought to be a parallel group that displays the rejected > posts e.g. uk.rec.cycling.moderated and uk.rec.cycling.rejected =A0At > least then it would be possible for the reader to assess how the > discussion is being distorted by the intervention of the moderators.

Excellent idea. Then it will become all too plain if (when) posts are being rejected by moderators purely on the basis that they make a good argument for the "wrong" point of view and the "wrong" side might win the debate if they're allowed through.