Nuxx:MPG.266796eda1010683989756@news.zen.co.uk

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!feeder.erje.net!ecngs!feeder2.ecngs.de!zen.net.uk!hamilton.zen.co.uk!reader02.news.zen.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Guy Cuthbertson  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.moderation Subject: Re: 1st Draft - urcm FAQ Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 21:37:39 +0100 References:  Lines: 70 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: 171db9d3.news.zen.co.uk X-Trace: DXC=@cFSh>RYEBD27L3jl6UT;LYjZGX^207PK`<MJMoM3PFM7eb9[IKohTBBH4535cfTO@?e;;_9WkSEDeg:6PW@hBJI X-Complaints-To: abuse@zen.co.uk Bytes: 4370 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.moderation:30552

I know you'd probably rather I didn't say this, but that was absolutely brilliant (up there with Ian Smith's post about Chapman rolling in excrement on the "Greatest posts of all time by URC 'regulars'" list). It's a wonderful summary of the terrible way in which URCM is being "run" and the ideal place for someone who knows nothing about it all to start (a shame you can't make it a sticky within UNNM...and URCM).

In article , kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge says... > > Q I have tried emailing the moderators, but they did not respond. What > can I do? > A Their email system is broken, so it might be that the moderators > have not received your email. You could try posting your complaint to > uk.net,news.moderation.

Then you need:

Q I have tried posting to UNNM, but the moderators haven't replied to any of my perfectly reasonable questions. Why is this? A They only answer questions that they think they can answer without losing face (other psycholists also display this "quality"). Also personality is again a factor here (of course), although they will still sometimes answer questions by people they don't like as long as they're easy enough to answer without looking incompetent, inconsistent, biased and/or wrong in some way.

> Q But I have seen posts in urcm that are rude, abrasive and impolite, > why have they not been blocked? > A It may be that the rude and abrasive posts you saw came from someone > on the allowed list and their post was not seen by a moderator, or it > may have been permitted by a moderator as moderation is by personality > as well as by content.

Yes, this is permanently and irrefutably documented in some of the posts which have been let through. This of course is why some of URCM's few remaining out-and-out defenders are so determined to keep the newsgroup as it is: they like being able to insult people without them being allowed to reply (as well as the other "perks" like not being argued with on certain subjects whether or not they are correct).

> Q But surely Ian Jackson is in charge of the group. > A No. > > Q But why. > A Because he says he isn't in charge.

They're really doing themselves no favours with that particular charade. Surely someone somewhere has to be in charge of every moderated newsgroup ultimately. I don't know why they don't just say something like "He's in charge but he doesn't use his authority when it comes to moderation decisions".

> Q But I cannot believe this. > A That is not a question.

Excellent post Tom: your best ever that I've read. You've come out with some unbelievable anti-car crap in your time but the above is gold. I think your pupils would be inspired; I don't know what subject you teach but perhaps you could use URCM as the example of how NOT to do things (or how to abuse authority, or how not to react to being wrong about things, or....)

It has to be said that some of us predicted all this from the very beginning. Perhaps people will be more wary of believing unlikely- looking promises from the likes of Jackson in future. It's not as if he wasn't renowned as someone who killfiled anyone he disagreed with; how anyone genuinely thought he was going to run a proper newsgroup is beyond me. Time for someone with some influence to repair the damage methinks.