Xref: utzoo alt.sources.d:126 comp.sources.d:4179 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!talos!kjones From: kjones@talos.uucp (Kyle Jones) Newsgroups: alt.sources.d,comp.sources.d Subject: moderation of alt.sources vs. automated harangues Message-ID: <1989Oct13.192835.1330@talos.uucp> Date: 13 Oct 89 19:28:35 GMT References: <2024@convex.UUCP> Reply-To: kjones@talos.uu.net Lines: 38 In article <2024@convex.UUCP> tchrist@convex.com (Tom Christiansen) writes: > I've been getting a lot of hate mail, most of which is automatic, > by self-appointed moderators of alt.sources for a comment I > posted there. And I'm pretty tired of it. > > I CAN'T CANCEL THE DAMN MESSAGE SO GET OFF MY BACK!!! > > I've tried and our news software is in some state of hosery > which disallows this practice. If you think alt.sources > should be restricted, moderate it. If not, stop bitching. I agree. If alt.sources was supposed to be a magical forum where everyone is Good and no non-source postings would occur, then I'd say the experiment has failed. People will forget to edit the newsgroups line when responding. New users will emerge who don't know about the sources-only rule, or who've never heard of alt.sources.d. And some people steadfastly refuse to stop posting discussions to the source groups no matter how much you plead. Or harangue. The latter may deserve "hate mail" but certainly not the others. So moderate alt.sources. But do it the way comp.sources.misc was originally going to be moderated: Axe non-source postings, and THAT'S ALL. Malcontents still can thwart the moderation scheme, but the main problem is articles posted by accident, or because of ignorance. The occasional miscreant can be cut off. kyle jones ...!uunet!talos!kjones "Come to the edge," he said. But they held back. "It's dangerous," they said. "Come to the edge." "But we might fall..." "COME TO THE EDGE!" So they came to the edge. And he pushed them... And they FELL... --Hume Cronyn for SIGNET Bank (a pessimist's reprise)