Nuxx:Dcd286ce-8c49-4a98-87ca-a4777fe55bc9@w21g2000yqm.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!w21g2000yqm.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.moderation Subject: Re: URCM Post Held for Over 3 Days! Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 09:56:47 -0700 (PDT) References: <654cd483-0bd0-451b-a1c8-44d08e152075@22g2000prx.googlegroups.com>   <4d957ae7$0$22746$c3e8da3$63ee2bc3@news.astraweb.com> <1e4bp61hu963gh8n2noienmm42t3msmks2@4ax.com> Lines: 62 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 1301677007 23769 127.0.0.1 (1 Apr 2011 16:56:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 16:56:47 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: w21g2000yqm.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=WrLs9woAAAD151hWKA9yknAtxFHW4kE4 User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Firefox/3.6.15,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 4544 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.moderation:39817

On Apr 1, 9:55 am, Geoff Berrow  wrote: > On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 08:12:33 +0100, Nick  > wrote: > > > > >On 31/03/2011 19:22, Geoff Berrow wrote: > >> On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 10:34:08 -0700 (PDT), Nuxx Bar > >>  wrote: > > >>> A controversial thread-starter like this one should at the very least > >>> give proper citations for the references it is quoting. > > >> 3 days? It took me 3 seconds to come up with this article which has > >> references at the end > > >>http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=84072 > > >Very curious, I can assure you that numbness is of interest to cyclists > >and I remember it being discussed in urc a number of times without problem. > > >Maybe one of the mods explain what the controversy is? > > I'd like to know that too.

Perhaps we will shortly. Mr Frost has made another post with the same subject line, yesterday at "16:5x" (the "x" thing is such a great and foolproof way of stopping people finding out who's on the passlist!) Hopefully that post will have addressed the (stated) concerns of the "moderators". So now we'll see whether they find a different excuse to reject it, admit that they think Micky Frost is actually a banned poster, or just allow the post since it conforms to the charter. The last option is the best for the "moderators" if they want to stay in a job; it's also the most unlikely, which says a lot, and we get the same thing time and time again.

Anyway, even that second post has now been delayed for over 24 hours, which even in itself is unacceptable. Altogether, Mr Frost has been kept waiting for a staggering 4 days and 2 hours, and counting, and still hasn't had a post approved. Not very welcoming, and not the treatment that one is entitled to expect when posting to a public newsgroup; it's more what you'd get from a particularly snooty private club (even a decent private club would just say "no" in short order...whichever way you look at it, there's absolutely no excuse for this ridiculous delay...I don't know whether it's deliberate, in order to punish/discourage Mr Frost, or whether it's because the "moderators" are having a heated email exchange, but it's inexcusable whatever the "reason").

If Micky Frost is indeed a banned poster playing a game, then once again he/she is getting exactly what they want, and the pathetic "moderators" are playing right into their hands. The behaviour of (some of) the "moderators" *never changes* no matter what threats are made...the urge to abuse their position in order to give their opponents a hard time is just too strong, and they seem to think that if they can't do that then there's no point in being "moderators" at all (which shows just how much they really care about supporting "cycling" or "cycling on Usenet"). They simply have no desire to moderate in a way that reasonable people would call fair...they would rather be ousted, so they're just going to carry on until they're stopped. Determinedly defiant to the last, and they've surely blown their last chance now. Gimme an R, gimme an F....