On Mar 8, 8:30�am, "KC4UAI" wrote:
On Mar 6, 8:04 pm, John Smith I wrote:





To Whom It May Concern:

Following is a message taken from RRAM. *My REJECTED response to that
message. *And, a message from the automaton on WHY the message was rejected.
snip
Your message has been rejected because you posted into a thread that had
strayed off topic and was closed by the moderators. All messages from
all posters, posted to this thread, are autorejected, and this rejection
does not single you out in any way.

Please read the charter of rec.radio.amateur.moderated at:

* * * *http://www.panix.com/~rram/usenet/rram/index.html

Please direct any queries to .
snip

John,

So your message was rejected because the thread was closed.... I don't
see a problem with that.

Not if one is a moderator. :-(

Try understanding that not everyone is a daily participant
in any newsgroup. They may be absent for several days.
Those non-daily participants MAY have something cogent
and meaningful about a discussion topic. A solution to the
"closed thread" could be a simple posting that a particular
thread has been closed by "the moderators."

Such a message does NOT have to be the multi-screen
multi-quote and link-full messages usually sent. Let's not
waste any more time for anyone with all this very-NON-
instant messaging.

I've been a participant in computer-modem communications
for 23 years on BBSs, private networks, and the Internet
carried "usenet" newsgroups. Yes, I've also been a moderator
on some large local BBSs and know what it is like. You WILL
get angry denunciations from the dissatisfied. TS. The skin
MUST grow tough and thick to do the job.

Now there is a "board" of moderators...more likely one has
their "turn in the barrel" for a day, checking up on content.
If the "board" wanted to do a good job, go out on PATROL;
i.e., roam the territory and, if something irritates them, try
sending warning messages privately, then publicly. It is
better than simply "closing the doors" and not saying
anything to anyone in public.

If you do, please appeal the decision and it will be reviewed by the
board, who are not involved in any of the day to day moderation
decisions.

The "board" ought to get its act together as a unit...work
on this "moderation" as a cohesive unit, not a disparate
collection of individuals relying on some (unknown)
program "robocop" checking out the post content of
those NOT on the "white list," sending out private e-mail
notices, and generally wasting time with all this "appeals"
busy work which can take days.

What we've got is a fine medium for written comms to
spread at the speed of light but a bunch of overseers
busy with overkill on content so that days and days
pass along with extreme interruption of a thread subject.

Now, if the "moderators" can't tell the difference between
middle-school machismo sex talk along with personal
insult and invective compared with heated discussion on
polarized subject threads...just give up. I don't think all
the "organized officialdom pontification" is going to do
its job effectively. Unless "effective" is a re-definition of
one-sided, nice-nice group think that is far from
DISCUSSION as it can get. George Orwell had a point
with both novels "Animal Farm" and "1984."

On "moderation" I've been there, got lots of T-shirts,
wore out a few. The "moderated newsgroup" idea is
nice only in theory but, in practice, it is just trying to
re-invent a wheel...one that has lots of flat sections
on it. That's been done before and hasn't worked well.
The "board" may be an innovation but all those "appeals"
are just time-wasting busy work. Think about it.

73, AF6AY