POLL: Would you participate in a rec.aviation.piloting.moderated newsgroup?

While I do not have a lot of time to spare for it, I would be willing to
perform the "dirty work" necessary toward creation of a moderated version
of this newsgroup. It would co-exist with this unmoderated one.

But I need to know if there is a large enough potential audience of users
for such a group. So if you would be willing to carry on conversations on
such a group (keeping in mind that posts would be delayed) please post a
reply to this message so stating your willingness. I'm sorry that I cannot
say yet who might moderate, other than to point out that the technical
capability exists to support multiple moderators such that the most lenient
judgement would prevail. If you must, assume the worst (that I am the sole
moderator.)

Since this newsgroup would continue to exist, and because competing web
forums already exist, there does not seem anything of interest that could
be said by those who might oppose creation of such a group.

The RFD would simply state that posts will be approved so long as they are
reasonably on-topic and non-inflammatory in the subjective judgement of the
moderators. Worst case is that posters can always return to this non-
moderated group in the event their posts are rejected or they feel the
moderators have become too anal or otherwise lost their minds.

On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 22:48:22 -0500, Jim Logajan wrote:

While I do not have a lot of time to spare for it, I would be willing to
perform the "dirty work" necessary toward creation of a moderated version
of this newsgroup. It would co-exist with this unmoderated one.

It already exists. POA.

See you there!
--
A fireside chat not with Ari!
http://tr.im/holj
Motto: Live To Spooge It!

On Sep 19, 11:48*pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
While I do not have a lot of time to spare for it, I would be willing to
perform the "dirty work" necessary toward creation of a moderated version
of this newsgroup. It would co-exist with this unmoderated one.

But I need to know if there is a large enough potential audience of users
for such a group. So if you would be willing to carry on conversations on
such a group (keeping in mind that posts would be delayed) please post a
reply to this message so stating your willingness. I'm sorry that I cannot
say yet who might moderate, other than to point out that the technical
capability exists to support multiple moderators such that the most lenient
judgement would prevail. If you must, assume the worst (that I am the sole
moderator.)

Since this newsgroup would continue to exist, and because competing web
forums already exist, there does not seem anything of interest that could
be said by those who might oppose creation of such a group.

The RFD would simply state that posts will be approved so long as they are
reasonably on-topic and non-inflammatory in the subjective judgement of the
moderators. Worst case is that posters can always return to this non-
moderated group in the event their posts are rejected or they feel the
moderators have become too anal or otherwise lost their minds.

It's a totally reasonable idea Jim, and for the little I remain
involved with Usenet, I would naturally support your effort.
The problem as I see it anyway, is the usual Usenet issue; that being
most Usenet users don't seem to mind the trolling and obvious posting
by the same individuals using different posting personae so they can
argue with themselves believing or not caring that anyone with a room
temperature IQ knows they are the same people :-)
Personally, my guess is that the result of such an effort will be a
modicum of people for such a forum and a majority content to leave
things the way they are and simply avoiding the idiots and morons the
Usenet venue seems to attract.
You will notice that the exact reason you are suggesting a moderated
group is in play here now and has been for some
time. :-)))))))))))))))))
Anyway, as I said, it's a reasonable idea and a shame it probably
won't get the support you need to make it work.
I could be wrong, but my experience tells me I'm guessing pretty close
to right on this.....................but the best of luck with it and
I hope you manage to get something going, as what's happened here is a
real shame.
Dudley

On Sep 20, 3:48*pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
While I do not have a lot of time to spare for it, I would be willing to
perform the "dirty work" necessary toward creation of a moderated version
of this newsgroup. It would co-exist with this unmoderated one.

But I need to know if there is a large enough potential audience of users
for such a group. So if you would be willing to carry on conversations on
such a group (keeping in mind that posts would be delayed) please post a
reply to this message so stating your willingness. I'm sorry that I cannot
say yet who might moderate, other than to point out that the technical
capability exists to support multiple moderators such that the most lenient
judgement would prevail. If you must, assume the worst (that I am the sole
moderator.)

Since this newsgroup would continue to exist, and because competing web
forums already exist, there does not seem anything of interest that could
be said by those who might oppose creation of such a group.

The RFD would simply state that posts will be approved so long as they are
reasonably on-topic and non-inflammatory in the subjective judgement of the
moderators. Worst case is that posters can always return to this non-
moderated group in the event their posts are rejected or they feel the
moderators have become too anal or otherwise lost their minds.

Good idea but you'd have to keep links to it in here otherwise no-one
would know where the sensible went

In article ,
Jim Logajan wrote:

While I do not have a lot of time to spare for it, I would be willing to
perform the "dirty work" necessary toward creation of a moderated version
of this newsgroup. It would co-exist with this unmoderated one.

But I need to know if there is a large enough potential audience of users
for such a group. So if you would be willing to carry on conversations on
such a group (keeping in mind that posts would be delayed) please post a
reply to this message so stating your willingness.

yes

On Sep 19, 11:48*pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
While I do not have a lot of time to spare for it, I would be willing to
perform the "dirty work" necessary toward creation of a moderated version
of this newsgroup. It would co-exist with this unmoderated one.

But I need to know if there is a large enough potential audience of users
for such a group. So if you would be willing to carry on conversations on
such a group (keeping in mind that posts would be delayed) please post a
reply to this message so stating your willingness. I'm sorry that I cannot
say yet who might moderate, other than to point out that the technical
capability exists to support multiple moderators such that the most lenient
judgement would prevail. If you must, assume the worst (that I am the sole
moderator.)

Since this newsgroup would continue to exist, and because competing web
forums already exist, there does not seem anything of interest that could
be said by those who might oppose creation of such a group.

The RFD would simply state that posts will be approved so long as they are
reasonably on-topic and non-inflammatory in the subjective judgement of the
moderators. Worst case is that posters can always return to this non-
moderated group in the event their posts are rejected or they feel the
moderators have become too anal or otherwise lost their minds.

I am currently in a moderated forum. My last topic was responded
to by 38 different people who intelligently and methodically gave
input, cites, and personal knowledge which covered my subject.
There were no disparaging comments. Trolls never obtain
membership in the first place, and knuckleheads get ejected.
It darn near meets the definition of perfection.

In this group I push the envelope of concepts. While this may
bring inflammatory responses, I find that to be part of the "art"
of exploration. The troll and his sockpuppets don't count. That
is just a middle-aged psychopath in need of "enlightenment".
Based on past experience I generally find that subsequently,
my detractors, over time, are always wrong 99% of the time.
Unfortunately by the time this happens the dust has settled
and the parties are long gone.

Moderated groups usually fail due to lack of foot-traffic. You
end up with 7 people who run out of things to say. The exception
to this is an advertised and specialized category. In that case
you may become the defacto source for specialized information.
This group doesn't fit that category.

The solution you are seeking is...facebook.

I am not a member.

---
Mark

On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 06:04:12 -0700 (PDT), Mark wrote:

I am currently in a moderated forum. My last topic was responded
to by 3809 different people who intelligently and methodically gave
input, cites, and personal knowledge which covered my subject.

I sat back and puffed on me pipey watching in amazement at the fools
trying to best me.

There were no superior comments. Trolls never obtain membership in
the first place, and knuckleheads get ejected. I don't have to
spend eons of my precious time defending myself and my very
important usenet reputation.It darn near meets the definition of
perfection. They have renamed it "Mark's World" because of that.

Then why don't you stay the **** there?
--
Bear Bottoms
Private Attorney General

On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 06:04:12 -0700 (PDT), Mark wrote:

In this group I push the electric envelope of make believe concepts.
While this may bring inflammatory responses, I find that to be part
of the "art" and I have an art school named for me. of exploration.
The Jew troll and his sockpuppets don't count. I can count to ten.

As you can see, I ignore them.


This group is just middle-aged psychopaths in need of
"enlightenment". I suplly that to this stale, half-dead group.
Based on past experience I generally find that subsequently, my
detractors, over time, are always wrong 99% of the time. I teach,
theylisten. It is who I am. Mark. Unfortunately by the time this
happens the dust has settled and the parties are long gone.

I wonder if I will ever get laid.

No.

You won't.
--
If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper,
before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of
journalists is to destroy the truth; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn
at the feet of mammon, and to sell this country and this race for
their daily bread. We are the tools and vessels for rich men behind
the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we
dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the
property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes." ~ John
Swinton, former Chief of Staff of the New York Times and the "Dean of
his Profession"

On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 06:04:12 -0700 (PDT), Mark wrote:

Moderated groups usually fail due to lack of foot-traffic. You end
up with 7 people who run out of things to say. This is where I step
in with my brilliance.

The exception to this is an advertised and specialized category. In
that case you may become the defacto source for specialized
information. This group doesn't fit that category. I prefer
pedo****ing and Viagra groups.

The solution you are seeking is...mySpace.

www.gayincarolina.com

I am not a member. But my member is.

---
Mark Gay, Brilliant Ad Superior To All

What a ****tard you are. A reject, when your hopefully dead Mother saw
you coming out, she screamed horribly in the greatest anguish. "Kill
this violation of nature!".

Jim Logajan wrote:
The RFD would simply state that posts will be approved so long as they
are reasonably on-topic and non-inflammatory in the subjective
judgement of the moderators.

Scratch all that!

It is quicker and easier for all involved if users must perform a one-time
registration post (in which their e-mail address, posting handle, and NSP
are recorded, though if a posting handle is used the e-mail address is not
published.) The registration is manually validated by a moderator who
approves all registrations. After registration approval, when the user
posts, the NSP and posting handle are automatically checked against the
record list and the post is approved if a record is found.

Pros:
No delay in postings.
No extra work for moderators.
No easy nym-shifting by malevolent posters.

Cons:
De-registration for abuse can only occur after-the-fact.