Nuxx:65543f29-5d4c-46fb-a284-7a50cfd81a9d@j11g2000yqh.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!j11g2000yqh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <65543f29-5d4c-46fb-a284-7a50cfd81a9d@j11g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.moderation Subject: Re: Address needed before posting Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:04:05 -0800 (PST) References:  <8rie5sFjnqU1@mid.individual.net> <7vtd28xhje.ln2@news.ducksburg.com>  <8s5p0hFh0fU1@mid.individual.net> Lines: 28 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.71.49.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1297994645 20451 127.0.0.1 (18 Feb 2011 02:04:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 02:04:05 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: j11g2000yqh.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.80 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5.8; U; en) Presto/2.7.62 Version/11.01,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 2798 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.moderation:37655

On Feb 17, 11:24=A0pm, "Steve Walker"  wrote: > > The only sensible course is to moderate primarily by content. =A0it's sim= ple > and clear, it's measurable and it's accountable to your user community.

And it's something that they have *absolutely no* intention of even trying to do. Right from the beginning, the very purpose of the group was to do precisely the opposite. They will never even consider treating their "enemies" with anything but deliberate discrimination and contempt.

Surely that is entirely obvious to everyone by now. People with no conceivable axe to grind have been telling the "moderators" to moderate by content, repeatedly, for a very long time now, yet it simply isn't happening. Why not? Surely even the most charitable among us can't get away from "deliberate bloody-mindedness" as by
 * far* the most likely explanation.

They've been given chance after chance to play ball; it's crystal clear that they have no interest in doing so. They have no wish to perform moderation to the basic standards required, one of which is a content-based policy: they merely call it "moderation" for their own ends, i.e. so they can have a uk.* group. How much more evidence do we need? There is no more room for giving them the benefit of the doubt: it can only be that they know exactly what they're doing, they're hoodwinking and taking the piss out of *everyone*, and I really think it's time to get tough with them.