Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!uflorida!novavax!proxftl!twwells!bill From: bill@twwells.uucp (T. William Wells) Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Subject: How can a moderator take a vacation? (Re: comp.sources.unix) Message-ID: <200@twwells.uucp> Date: 21 Nov 88 19:45:21 GMT References: <184@twwells.uucp> <7681@well.UUCP> Reply-To: bill@twwells.UUCP (T. William Wells) Organization: None, Ft. Lauderdale Lines: 85 In article <7681@well.UUCP> Jef Poskanzer writes: : In the referenced message, bill@twwells.UUCP (T. William Wells) wrote: : >Mr. Poskanzer, : >Shut your yap. We moderate newsgroups out of generosity, spending : >time and money to so, because we believe that what we are doing is a : >good thing. You have no business badmouthing one of us because he : >isn't doing it just the way you'd like. : : I write free software out of generosity, spending time and money to : do so, because I believe that what I am doing is a good thing. But : when I try to get it distributed, what do I find? The moderated sources : groups are dead for months at a time, and the unmoderated sources group : reaches only half the net. I'm not the only one who has pointed this out. : I'm not the only one who objects. Well, I know there is a problem. I've noticed that the moderated groups tend to have their on and off periods. And constructive suggestions for dealing with this are needed. Not only that, but sooner or later, I'm going to want to take a vacation (they'll never believe me at work :-), and I'd certainly like to have some way to keep comp.archives from dying while I am gone. So I view this as something worth thinking about. : >Suggestions are welcome, personal remarks are not. : : Yes, suggestions are welcome, but holier-than-thou chest-beating is not. : And by the way, the message you replied to included a suggestion. Perhaps : you were too busy yapping to notice and comment on it. It is certainly : clear that the moderators are uninterested in making any suggestions of : their own. Had you stopped right after the suggestion, I'd have been a little irritated at the sarcasm displayed in the earlier part of the posting, but I'd have been more than happy to talk about constructive solutions to the problem. But then you went off and insulted the person you were talking to. That is not the mark of a person who is trying to solve a problem, and so I didn't see any reason to talk about your proposal. --- Here's your chance. Since I would like to see a discussion about this, I'll repost your suggestion and make my comments. And hope that your replies don't contain more insults. : Anyway, I was thinking more along the lines of a primary moderator and : a backup moderator. Both would receive the postings, but the backup would : normally throw them out. However, if the primary disappears for a while, : or perhaps even goes on a real vacation, the backup would be able to take : over with minimal fuss. This could be made to work. However, there are several things that need to be dealt with for it to. The first is that the backbone sites have to have the newsgroups aliased to both names. This ought not to be anything more than an administrative problem. The second has to do with communication. Some method needs to be established so that the backup moderator knows when to pick up the traces. Again, not too much of a problem, just needs setting up the procedures. There is also the extra mail bandwidth. This can be serious when the newsgroup deals with large things, as the source and binary newsgroups often do. The main problem with this method is that the alternate moderator can't get at messages related to the newsgroup that are sent to the main moderator's personal account. I get quite a few of these, and I don't suppose that I am unique. I can't think of any scheme that doesn't require explicit handing-off by the moderator that gets this mail to the alternate moderator. There is another, simpler, method: just have the moderator forward his mail to the alternate moderator when he goes on vacation. This has several drawbacks. First, if the moderator is also his system administrator (as is the case with comp.archives), there is nothing guaranteeing that his system will stay up while he is on vacation. Second, there is an additional delay for the forwarded mail. Third, it does nothing for the case where the moderator "disappears", after things like accidents, etc. And, of course, it doesn't solve the problem of people who send mail to the moderator's personal account (though the moderator can forward anything in his queue when he goes on vacation). Any comments? --- Bill {uunet|novavax}!proxftl!twwells!bill