Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:13:00 -0500, "KH6HZ" wrote:
Great proposal. Can't wait to cast my vote for the affirmative. The only dissenting opinion you'll find are those who wish to spew their sewage into a forum like such, and will otherwise be shut out from doing so. 73 KH6HZ That's not true. I'll vote against it and you can hardly accuse me of being shut out since I left here years ago rather than waste many hours accomplishing nothing constructive. The reason being that this group is too polarized with no room for dissenting opinions. No moderation is going to be impartial because no moderators are impartial. Therefore, a moderated ng will not reflect the opinions of hams in general. Instead, they will reflect the opinions approved by biased moderators. My advice is to go to googlegroups, yahoogroups, or any of the other *.groups and start your own moderated community/group there instead of trying to start your own moderated newsgroup on Usenet. It's a lot easier. I would say that without people whose only objective is to stifle dissenting opinion gone, this would be a better newsgroup. However, we all know that people will post to both newsgroups and probably get banned for something that they posted here. I had hoped that, once the code vs. no-code childishness was over, these ng's would be useful again. I'm beginning to see that I was wrong. I'll try back here in a few years to see if things have improved any. 73 |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Were the moderated newsgroup proponents just blowing smoke? | Policy | |||
VOTE, Moderated or Free Speech? | Policy | |||
Conversion To Moderated Group | Policy |