-- Quote --
Whilst the thought of a moderated group does not particularly appeal to
me,
I would be open to options that would get a newsgroup back to a
semblance of
what it was designed for. Kill-filing offenders leaves you with
nothing
around these parts today. Take a look in this newsgroup right now.
-------

I understand the issue here with moderation. Where I'm not going to
start quoting form "1984", I agree that heavy handed moderation is
unlikely to get you something that anybody wants to read as apparently
the open to everything buries the good stuff in too much noise that
nobody wants to sift though.

But the problem here is much like the trade offs in good receiver
design. To much bandwidth, to much noise to hear the desired signal,
not enough bandwidth and you will loose valuable information. Right now
we have a first IF that's way to wide and the meaningful stuff is lost
in the noise. Imagine trying to hear that CW signal when you have to
hear everything for 6Khz? You can do it, but why go though the pain?
Why would you try to listen to a SSB conversation with the 500Hz CW
filter in place?

Of course it all has trade offs. I'm not so sure that a bit of
bandwidth reduction might not be useful on this group. I'm a bit tired
of the flame wars myself however any attempt to do this must recognize
that disagreement (while not being disagreeable) is a good thing.

-= KC4UAI =-