Nuxx:B7b77f53-a83f-4428-9aea-c9b4bc9b534b@k9g2000yqi.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!k9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.moderation Subject: Re: Address needed before posting Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:13:07 -0800 (PST) References: <1jwzqeb.hwcyez6jleb1N%real-not-anti-spam-address@apple-juice.co.uk>  <8sd6d8F4moU1@mid.individual.net> <68abf5f1-00c5-42b9-b14e-b15a50b43c23@w7g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>  <5257fb34-bf63-45c4-9d83-b963e9456837@r12g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>  <3qf4m69uflvkaem9jgk67s5ooff5htihdj@4ax.com>    Lines: 42 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 1298319188 4072 127.0.0.1 (21 Feb 2011 20:13:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 20:13:08 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: k9g2000yqi.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: 3383 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.moderation:37752

On Feb 21, 7:36=A0pm, Danny Colyer  wrote: > On 21/02/2011 14:58, Geoff Berrow wrote: > > > Note that moderators have resigned, two of whom at least > > because they found the decisions intolerable. > > Really? > > I'm aware of one moderator resigning because she was unhappy with the > moderation process. =A0A moderator who was, in fact, invited to be a > moderator only after expressing concerns in this very group about said > process. > > I don't remember a second resigning for such reasons. =A0Could you refres= h > my memory?

Peter Fox:

http://www.vulpeculox.net/omnilog/archives/519

He thought debate was being "sanitised and suffocated"...I can't imagine why.

I would be surprised if Roger Thorpe didn't have some reservations as well. Maybe even Simon Brooke.

And I would be very surprised if you, as one of the more reasonable "moderators", were completely happy with the way things were going. Why not have a go at changing things from within? Is there maybe an ever-present veiled threat from the Chief that if you don't go along with his particularly draconian brand of "moderation" without complaint, he'll either hound you out or stop Chiark being used for URCM?

Do you personally think JMS or I should have been banned? If the answer were no then would you perhaps feel unable to say so publicly, not because it would be "unprofessional" to contradict what you've decided collectively as "moderators", but because of the aforementioned veiled threat? If you are indeed quietly going with the flow despite being uncomfortable with what you're a part of, do you intend to continue in that vein indefinitely?