Re: Moderation

[mhackett@alpha.vaxxine.com (Michael Hackett)]

In article <4se4qs$44r@crl2.crl.com>, Joe Kohn <joko@crl.com> wrote:
> My suggestion will not be popular, but I think the time has come
> to have csa2 moderated. The flame fest has simply gotten too far out of
> hand.

I'm afraid I have to agree.

Nathan Mates <nathan@parka.winternet.com> wrote:
[re: the new moderated Babylon 5 newsgroup]
>    What eventually happened was leaving the old group intact (which
> still has just as many flames), but creating a moderated newsgroup
> where people who wanted an intelligent discussion safe from flames and
> the like could hang out. That got through, and has worked fairly
> well.
>
>    Essentially, we have a computer program that looks at all new posts
> (moderated usenet groups go through one point, which allows this to
> happen), and if the author is on an "approved" list, it is allowed
> through. People on the "handmoderated" list, as well as first time
> posters and the first post in any thread are all human approved.

This sounds like a decent option, and may be the only way to save csa2.
Look at how many people have left recently because of the garbage that's
been going (not singling anyone out -- there's been a few offenders).  It
would also help get rid of all the Mac postings.

>    c.s.a2 is a hierarchy, which makes the above six times worse.

Fortunately, the other subgroups don't seem to be plagued by the same kind
of mess.  They are so low volume that the occassional off topic message is
almost welcomed. :-)

-- 
Michael Hackett
Some Assembly Required