Nuxx:MPG.26f770d757b1c4b89897e5@news.zen.co.uk

Path: num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!news2.euro.net!feeder.news-service.com!tudelft.nl!txtfeed1.tudelft.nl!dedekind.zen.co.uk!zen.net.uk!hamilton.zen.co.uk!reader02.news.zen.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.moderation Subject: Re: Nominations invited for new moderators Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 00:21:27 +0100 References: <8f2hl4Ft9jU1@mid.individual.net>    Lines: 27 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/2.9.14 Organization: Zen Internet NNTP-Posting-Host: 671f1207.news.zen.co.uk X-Trace: DXC=\FROg`EfCDU\nQ2]`j5R=PYjZGX^207P[`, ian@astounding.org.uk says... > > I won't moderate the group anyway.

Can I ask why? Is it because you don't approve of the current moderation methods, or are you just not interested full stop? If the former, wouldn't joining the panel be one way to improve matters? I feel confident that if you came across one of Chapman's shit-rolling jibes as a URCM moderator, you would rightly reject it, rather than waving it through because Chapman's a "club member" (as has happened multiple times already).

The people I suggested have a wide range of opinions, and some of them I usually disagree with, but they have all shown themselves to be relatively reasonable and tolerant towards those who have different opinions (except Trevor A Panther, who admittedly I was joking about, although it would be amusing to see him trying to moderate).

I think the current problems on URCM are mostly caused by the fact that the current moderators have more-or-less the same opinions on the "hot" issues, and many of them are hostile towards those who disagree. I genuinely think that replacing them with the people I've suggested would improve things for everyone except the worst of the car-hating nutters (the ones who support the "private club" aspect and the exclusion of contrasting opinions on the pretext that such opinions are "libertarian pro-motorist crap" and other hysterical, inaccurate terms).