| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
March 7th 07, 02:38 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
Message rejected by the automaton in RRAM thread ...
On Mar 6, 9:04�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. That's why I don't really bother to post anything to the new moderated group. Although it is a nice change of pace to read threads. Just by the nature of my posting name prevents any posts from getting through the moderators, plus its all subjective, what may get through today, may not pass tomorrow, who has time to decipher what is acceptable today and what will pass muster tomorrow, with each different moderator. In your case, even the reasoning provided by Paul shows that all the moderators are not on the same page. I would rather post on e-ham or qrz, even though they moderate, it appears that it is at least done at some level of consistent moderation.  I suppose it is probablyeasier on those sites because they have the forums broken down by subject matter with individual moderators for each subject, instead of the group moderation in place here. I guess that over time they will work out the kinks to be more consistent. Dloyd |
|
#3
March 7th 07, 11:42 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message rejected by the automaton in RRAM thread ...
Moderated newsgroups suck errect penis in a shemale' asscrack.
Always will too. |
|
#4
March 8th 07, 04:30 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message rejected by the automaton in RRAM thread ...
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. 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. -= bob =- |
|
#5
March 8th 07, 07:09 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message rejected by the automaton in RRAM thread ...
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 |
|
#6
March 8th 07, 07:16 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
just another stalking thread
On Mar 8, 2:09�pm, "
wrote: 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- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - just another stalking thread http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
|
#7
March 8th 07, 09:01 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message rejected by the automaton in RRAM thread ...
On Mar 8, 1:09 pm, "
wrote: 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. :-( I suppose you can claim bias because I'm a moderator... Even if it's not true, how do you go about disproving that charge? 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." I'll take that as a valid suggestion, that we post a message to the thread that says it is closed to further posting. I'll bring that up to the group and see what they say. 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. Don't think my feathers are ruffled here. I too have been involved in BBS activities for over two decades and had multiple fido-net nodes over the years. I do care that *constructive* critics are listened to, but I'm not offended when somebody disagrees with me. 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. Well, this is not how our policy works from your point of view. There is no way you could tell if the board is actively looking at the individual moderation decisions or not. I can assure you that the moderation software keeps logs, and the logs are being reviewed by the board on a regular basis. We have had regular discussions about decisions that where considered "border line" though just this avenue. However, if you feel a decision was improper, we have provided you a means of calling a specific event to their attention. That is the point of the appeals process. 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. So you would propose that we handle every message on the group one at a time though a single filter? I'm sorry, but that is not very workable in the real world. We are trying to maintain a reasonable discussion with a minimum of delay and what you propose might cause very large delays in getting posts approved. We decided that it was more important to be timely and depend upon a group of moderators making individual decisions. What you propose is a group of moderators debating every choice every time. Automation has it's limits and problems, I won't argue that point, but it's much better than doing this all by hand and having to deal with the delays involved with doing it that way. Snip the Orwell referance.. 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. Well I have only one T-Shirt and one Hat for my past efforts.... And we have thought about this quite a lot as a group. I'm satisfied that we have a reasonable compromise on how we are going about this. Is it perfect? Perhaps not, but what human endeavor is? We are open to suggestions on how to improve, and over time we surely will if we keep trying. -= bob =- |
|
#8
March 8th 07, 10:14 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message rejected by the automaton in RRAM thread ...
On Mar 8, 1:01�pm, "KC4UAI" wrote:
On Mar 8, 1:09 pm, " wrote: 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. *:-( I suppose you can claim bias because I'm a moderator... Even if it's not true, how do you go about disproving that charge? * No one can "disprove" an unseen "charge." It is a matter of OPINION that some do not like a particular system. * *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." I'll take that as a valid suggestion, that we post a message to the thread that says it is closed to further posting. *I'll bring that up to the group and see what they say. It could be a simple posting of just "closed." Takes up the least space, even with a short message of why it was closed. * *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. Don't think my feathers are ruffled here. *I too have been involved in BBS activities for over two decades and had multiple fido-net nodes over the years. *I do care that *constructive* critics are listened to, but I'm not offended when somebody disagrees with me. No sweat on that here. FIDO was a good training ground for some inordinately-dissatisfied posters. * *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. Well, this is not how our policy works from your point of view. *There is no way you could tell if the board is actively looking at the individual moderation decisions or not. *I can assure you that the moderation software keeps logs, and the logs are being reviewed by the board on a regular basis. We have had regular discussions about decisions that where considered "border line" though just this avenue. The "invisibility" of the current moderation process is what bothers many, including myself. I don't care how long a message is about the moderation process, all that such a message says is rather boilerplate PR to me. I've seen enough of that kind of "justification" from many sources and just hang a tag on it that says "Politics as Usual." One moderator, one quick action is what I CAN under- stand. However, if you feel a decision was improper, we have provided you a means of calling a specific event to their attention. *That is the point of the appeals process. And that can take days to resolve. That newsgroup is NOT a Court. Reach a decision and do it quickly, heated tempers will cool down faster and things return to normal (whatever that is) quickly. So you would propose that we handle every message on the group one at a time though a single filter? *I'm sorry, but that is not very workable in the real world. *We are trying to maintain a reasonable discussion with a minimum of delay and what you propose might cause very large delays in getting posts approved. "I proposed that?" Not quite. As I said, one moderator and one action. The way I see it is a "moderated" group IS moderated and, if that means to you each message reviewed, then so be it. To have SOME on a "non-moderated" basis in a "white list" of "pre-approved" posters will obviously invite the accusations of elitism. *We decided that it was more important to be timely and depend upon a group of moderators making individual decisions. *What you propose is a group of moderators debating every choice every time. Automation has it's limits and problems, I won't argue that point, but it's much better than doing this all by hand and having to deal with the delays involved with doing it that way. Since practicality of volunteerism MUST be considered, a group is necessary. But, the spectre of a moderator getting away from desired goals is ever-present. What is the check-and-balance for moderators? Any? If all they lose is some self-defined Status, that isn't much of a penalty. Snip the Orwell referance.. As you wish. I found it quite significant...and I was never a member of SWINE (Students Wildly Indignant about Nearly Everything) nor a draft-dodging rationalizer hoping for no draft call in the 60s (I'd already served my time in northeast Asia). One MUST be ever-watchful of "authority." Not to actively distrust them, but be WARY. That, too, is a human trait and gave rise to another little homily: Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Well I have only one T-Shirt and one Hat for my past efforts.... And we have thought about this quite a lot as a group. *I'm satisfied that we have a reasonable compromise on how we are going about this. *Is it perfect? *Perhaps not, but what human endeavor is? *We are open to suggestions on how to improve, and over time we surely will if we keep trying. I'm still waiting for this Perestroika, the "openness" to happen in the moderation "human endeavor." I don't see a trace of it yet. Color me skeptical if you will. 73, AF6AY |
|
#9
March 9th 07, 03:45 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message rejected by the automaton in RRAM thread ...
KC4UAI wrote:
... OMG! They made this guy a moderator? Whatever where they thinking? Says it all, doesn't it? JS -- http://assemblywizard.tekcities.com |
|
#10
March 8th 07, 09:53 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
Message rejected by the automaton in RRAM thread ...
On 8 Mar 2007 11:09:21 -0800, "
wrote: On Mar 8, 8:30?am, "KC4UAI" wrote: On Mar 6, 8:04 pm, John Smith I wrote: snip 73, AF6AY Hey - nice shiny new callsign you have there! Congrats to the new Extra! 73, Leo |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| First post to r.r.a.m results in a response from the automaton. | Policy | |||
| Paul Schleck Is Giving A Party at RRAM | Policy | |||
| Antenna Reception Theory - Message Thread on R.R.A.A. | Shortwave | |||
| Cruise almost rejected John Travolta in the steam room | Shortwave | |||
| PeePeeHolic REJECTED by VILLAGE PEOPLE: "Too Gay" they said. | CB | |||
Hybrid Mode
