|
Where Is Everybody?
On Sep 27, 1:32 pm, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 03:27:42 -0700, wrote: On Sep 27, 12:19 am, wrote: On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:47:51 -0700, wrote: On Sep 25, 8:06 pm, wrote: On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 16:03:13 wrote: On Sep 25, 6:57 pm, Leo wrote: Hmmm - that title sounds a bit like the first Twilight Zone episode! Since the new moderated group was created (whose mission was to improve communication and raise the bar on decency over the Policy group), everyone seems to have disappeared. The moderated group is virtually dead, containing primarily bulletins from Amateur groups around the world and the odd post hare and there....and the Policy group has degenerated into a "Mark vs the World" quagmire - quite unfortunately for Mark. With the exception of Dave Heil, who pops up from behind the ramparts here occasionally to take a well placed shot at his old nemesis Mr. Wiseman, no one seems to be left from the old crowd who regularly discoursed in this group. Even N2EY's regular "ARS Numbers" posts seem to have vanished into oblivion. Just wondering - what's up with Len, Mike,Dave, Jim, Brian, Steve, Dee, Kim, and the rest of the old regulars on the group? Hope all is well! 73, Leo I'm here. I'm not interested in .moderated. I do post some on-topic stuff, but no one wants to discuss it. For example, the ARRL gets it's own MARS call: Honestly more a RRAM topic than RRAP after why does the ARRL NEED a Mars Call Good question. Do you think they are just callsign collecting, or do you think they knowingly placed themselves into DoD service? honestly callsign collecting is my opinion after all just who is going to put in the time required to earn that Maras Call? Hiram Maxim back from the grave? Welp, they have a paid operator. In addition to the training, will he not send the w1aw morse practice 12 hours each month so he can meet the minimum input for MARS? sorryI forget the ARRL uses somewhat defferent rules Or will ARRL members pay for his usual 40 hours/week plus the 12 hours of overtime (minimum) each quarter? |
Moderated newsgroup daily activity
On Sep 27, 3:29 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote:
"Leo" wrote: Since the new moderated group was created (whose mission was to improve communication and raise the bar on decency over the Policy group), everyone seems to have disappeared. The moderated group is virtually dead, containing primarily bulletins from Amateur groups around the world and the odd post hare and there.... I suspect the reason why the .moderated group is dead is due to the 'standards' the moderators have decided to implement. For example, I was recently banned from the .moderated group. My "crime"? I had 3 rejected postings in a period of 4 months. Now, I was a staunch supporter of the .moderated group (and still believe a moderated group is a good thing.) I carefully went back and reviewed all the discussion on the group creation, and didn't see anywhere that such silly standards would be used. As the previous moderator of biz.sco.sources in the mid 90's, I would have thought such quantitative standards were outright silly. Over the years, I have participated in many moderated groups, comp.dcom.telecom being one I used extensively in the mid 90's when Pat Townsend(sp?) was the moderator. I can't count the number of rejected postings I've had from .telecom. Dozens. Yet, I never got any silly email from him telling me I was "banned". Instead, my messages were either rejected or simply never showed up. No big deal. That's his job, as moderator. To steer the discussion. If my comments didn't with within the discussion, it was his right to reject them. I actually laughed out loud when I got the email telling me I was suspended from .moderated on the basis of having 3 rejected postings over a 4 month period. I don't know who created that idea, but that's some serious anal-retentive tendencies there. The most disturbing part of the entire episode is none of these 'standards' were discussed up front. How many months have to go by before one of the rejected postings falls off the list? What happens if you have 3 rejected postings in 6 months? 12 months? 5 years? Do you still get banned if you have 3 rejected postings over a 10 year period? So, the reality is they are simply arbitrary ways for the moderators to squash those with dissenting opinion. No biggie, really. This summer I had to build a new barn, and right now I'm in the process of rehabbing the single-pane windows in my 300 year old ranch. Then I have to build wooden storm windows, and crawl into the attic and insulate. All before winter hits. I check in here maybe once every 2 to 3 weeks. Moderated even less. 73 kh6hz Mike, I figured you were one of the "IN" crowd. Regardless, the idea would have turned out badly as it meant too much to the Codies. |
Moderated newsgroup daily activity
On Sep 27, 9:27 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"Leo" wrote in message ... On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:29:15 -0400, "KH6HZ" wrote: "Leo" wrote: Since the new moderated group was created (whose mission was to improve communication and raise the bar on decency over the Policy group), everyone seems to have disappeared. The moderated group is virtually dead, containing primarily bulletins from Amateur groups around the world and the odd post hare and there.... I suspect the reason why the .moderated group is dead is due to the 'standards' the moderators have decided to implement. For example, I was recently banned from the .moderated group. My "crime"? I had 3 rejected postings in a period of 4 months. That's just weird. When your posts were rejected, were you advised of the specific reason for rejection? Given an opportunity to explain, or revise the offending post? And where was the 'three strikes' rule documented - I read over the charter just after the group was established, and I don't recall that being stated. I'm all for moderated groups, normally - they provide valuable filtering of off-topic and malicious posts. And I agree with you - if the moderators are practising abject censorship instead of moderation, then it becomes a forum consisting only of those who share similar thoughts of what is appropriate and what is not. In other words, a closed group. No thanks. I'd rather that I remain the judge of what I believe to be appropriate, rather than delegate that task to a group of net nannies! Normally I would agree with you. However, I got really tired of having to create new filters on a nearly daily basis to eliminate the hundreds of posts that flooded this news group on a regular basis. Those posts had nothing to do with policy and everything to do with personal wars. It was impossible to carry on any type of discussion without it being hijacked or turned into personal attacks. Even now, only a handful of posts make it through the filters. There's no particular virtue in staying in the swamp. Dee- Dee, I've never filtered anyone. I either read them or I don't. You CW buffs claim you can copy a single signal out of a pile-up, so why do you bother with rrap filters? |
Moderated newsgroup daily activity
"Leo" wrote:
That's just weird. You're telling me. When your posts were rejected, were you advised of the specific reason for rejection? Given an opportunity to explain, or revise the offending post? Yes, I was. One rejected posting I had actually intended to be sent to the moderators (who saw it anyway) so I saw no reason to resubmit it. Others, I simply opted not to change my comments, due to the timeliness of the discussion or what not. I bounced my offending posts off a friend of mine, who thought while my rhetoric was a little strong, my posts were not offensive in any way. (He's absolutely right -- I have strongly held opinions on subjects, and am not afraid to express them.) And where was the 'three strikes' rule documented - I read over the charter just after the group was established, and I don't recall that being stated. It isn't stated anywhere. I never heard of it until I received the "you are suspended" email. I'm all for moderated groups, normally - they provide valuable filtering of off-topic and malicious posts. Yes, exactly. .telecom is an excellent example of that, back in the 90's. I haven't read it in years (I'm pretty much out of the telecom segment these days) but in all the time I participated in that forum, I can't say Pat was ever unfair in his moderation practices. Of course, he rejected dozens of my postings, but I never experienced any silly bans. It is silly, really. Anyone with any net.knowledge can have an unlimited number of names, IP addresses, etc. There's really no way to "ban" someone. I could still be posting there today, if I really wanted to. |
Where Is Everybody?
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 20:17:49 -0400, "Dee Flint"
wrote: wrote in message roups.com... On Sep 25, 8:40 pm, wrote: On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 16:17:22 -0700, John Smith wrote: Leo wrote: ... Just wondering - what's up with Len, Mike,Dave, Jim, Brian, Steve, Dee, Kim, and the rest of the old regulars on the group? Hope all is well! 73, Leo The perverts have rein--however, what is new, the same thing has happened to my city ... :-( Besides, it seems that policy was not an interest, it was just a "stated ruse" to allow the CW Proclaimers to have voice and attempt to maintain control. sadly that seemed to have been the whole root of of that issue Sadly they grew upset that folks who weren't code advocates found a voice on policy, so they created a moderated group to exclude the no- coders. After the initial back-slapping, they found that they didn't have much to say to each other. No it was not created to keep no-coders out. Anyone who is polite can easily join and participate in the moderated group regardless of their opinions on code. bull**** if you are not liked by someone you simply get someone faking your id sending in 3 outragous posts then the id is banned "one useless man is disgrace 2 become a law firm 3 or more become a congress" adams woger you are a Congress all in your own head http://kb9rqz.bravejournal.com/ and get ou the newly recovered KB9RQZ.blogspot.com as well G -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Moderated newsgroup daily activity
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 17:47:07 -0700,
wrote: On Sep 27, 9:27 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote: "Leo" wrote in message ... There's no particular virtue in staying in the swamp. Dee- Dee, I've never filtered anyone. I either read them or I don't. You CW buffs claim you can copy a single signal out of a pile-up, so why do you bother with rrap filters? I am amazed by that too I can certainly find em the remaining posts why can't they? "one useless man is disgrace 2 become a law firm 3 or more become a congress" adams woger you are a Congress all in your own head http://kb9rqz.bravejournal.com/ and get ou the newly recovered KB9RQZ.blogspot.com as well G -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Where Is Everybody?
No it was not created to keep no-coders out. Anyone who is polite can easily join and participate in the moderated group regardless of their opinions on code. bull**** if you are not liked by someone you simply get someone faking your id sending in 3 outragous posts then the id is banned And why, pray tell, would ANYBODY have cause to dislike you, Mark? This is an odd observation from one who is now using Steve's callsign to post.... |
Where Is Everybody?
"Dee Flint" wrote:
snip No it was not created to keep no-coders out. Anyone who is polite can easily join and participate in the moderated group regardless of their opinions on code. Hello Dee You're right, I can post there without any reservation. -- http://NewsReader.Com/ |
Moderated newsgroup daily activity
On Sep 27, 11:09 pm, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 17:47:07 -0700, wrote: On Sep 27, 9:27 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote: "Leo" wrote in message . .. There's no particular virtue in staying in the swamp. Dee- Dee, I've never filtered anyone. I either read them or I don't. You CW buffs claim you can copy a single signal out of a pile-up, so why do you bother with rrap filters? I am amazed by that too I can certainly find em the remaining posts why can't they? Something to complain about? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:15 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com