Nuxx:Ba1e4a47-01bb-4170-aea4-3462598a2e42@i39g2000prd.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!i39g2000prd.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.moderation Subject: Re: URCM Bore Poll Results: Not What Jackson Wanted? Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 15:45:54 -0800 (PST) References:  <623d9489-13b1-459b-98d1-2bc2c3070dd5@w6g2000vbo.googlegroups.com>  Lines: 51 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 1299368754 30199 127.0.0.1 (5 Mar 2011 23:45:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 23:45:54 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: i39g2000prd.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110218 Firefox/3.6.14,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 3984 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.moderation:38506

On Mar 5, 5:10 pm, Tom Crispin  wrote: > > One of Ian Jackson's "Straw Poll" posts has been rejected as spam.

So I see. More abuse of "reject discard". So in "Straw Poll" we now have pending Jackson's other post (also yesterday at "16:5x" (lame)) and Danny Colyer's one at "17:4x" (lame) today. How much longer do we have to wait FFS?

> Something is being concealed.

Absolutely, as usual for URCM. This kind of constant and paranoid secrecy is yet another sign that URCM has fundamental problems with the way it's being run. There should be no need to keep so much information from the people that the newsgroup is supposed to be serving. Jackson has no respect for those who wish to use URCM (except the few people who think like him), he just sees them as a necessary evil so that he can have his private club in the uk.* hierarchy.

Clearly there is a lot of probably heated discussion among the "moderators" as to how these results should be spun, and it's pretty likely that Jackson is finding a lot of resistance to his disgusting agenda against Matt B and his inevitable determination to present the results as supporting that agenda (after all, you can prove anything you want to with statistics). It's great that the others are obviously standing up to him more and more, apparently even refusing to approve his posts now.

I'm starting to think that Jackson has actually been more-or-less on his own among the "moderators" in supporting such a draconian "moderation" style (at least to the extent he does) for quite a while, but the others went along with it because they felt it unadvisable to argue with the chiark administrator. That they're now refusing to put up with such bullying anymore is very heartening. I hope they follow through and get Jackson removed so that URCM can be what it should be. It looks as though we owe Eleanor Blair a debt of gratitude for getting the ball rolling, and I hope she won't be intimidated or bludgeoned into relenting (not that there's any sign of that thankfully). She has done more good for URCM in her short time as moderator than all the others combined ever have, and she should certainly be retained as a moderator whatever happens.

Again, this all serves Jackson right for not calling himself the Chief Moderator in the first place, as then he could have pulled rank. I guess he was arrogant enough to think that no-one would ever dare question him even if he didn't have such a title. Looks like "All the moderators will be equal" was one deceitful statement too many in the original RFD/CFV.

I like Ian Jackson. Almost as much as Tom does. :-)