He has! He's created his own little private newsgroup. Guess he neglected to realize that newsgroups can be crossposted to, and apparently nobody's told him about majordomo mailing lists, yahoo mailing lists, yahoo BBSs, googlegroups private groups, wwwboard BBSs, BLOGs, or any of the other ways to put together a private, fully moderated group.
Oh, wait - he wants the WHOLE WORLD to see what Guy Macon has to say, without suffering the dreadful inconvenience of allowing other people to express their opinion.
--
Then, instead of just bitching about it, do it. If you don\'t like it
around here or you don\'t like the way you\'re treated, then either get
a different attitude or get the fuck out of Dodge and make it better
for the rest of us who like it here.
Ah, and when people cross-post to your group, and to these non-moderated groups, the messages that go to these non-moderated groups are intercepted, edited, and then allowed to continue by you. Thus, anyone using your scheme must trust you enough to believe that you won't interfere with the content of their postings.
(BTW, clever clipping! Perhaps you can use that worthwhile skill to good effect as moderator of your new kingdom?)
You could start a mailing list digest... Simply distill those posts you consider worthy, and mail them out those poor disenchanted folk. However, that wouldn't give you the opportunity to edit people's posts to non-moderated newsgroups, simply because some newbie took your 'advice' and cross posted to your little kingdom.
It's still a delay, because these messages must pass through your computer. You (again) cleverly clipped out the 'worst case' scenario.
Your scheme is a transparent attempt to hijack and control traffic from this newsgroup. It's also a method that is older than the hills. You appear to think you are smart in trying it. You may wish to reconsider that opinion. I certainly have. This sort of thing has been going on since the 80s.
Further, when caught, you seem to be attempting to misdirect opinion about this by selectively clipping my post from the moderator's faq, and implying that I misunderstand the situation. Here is a link to the moderator's faq for those inclined to find the truth of the situation:
formatting link
A good moderator is smart enough to allow the chatter which binds people into a group, and honorable enough to gain the trust of the often brilliant folks who post to these groups. You appear to fail on both accounts.
I'm not about to clutter this group with more nonsense. You are quite good at starting flame wars, then sitting back and laughing as it roars on. You are a troll. I'd advise folks who are thinking of trying this new strategy to look over Guy's recent 'contributions' to this group.
I stated the facts as I see them. You are free to characterize them any way you wish, and to attempt to mislead readers. That is the essence of an unmoderated newsgroup.
What I stated is true. Any post cross-posted to your silly little kingdom can be edited or prohibited by you, regardless of your protestations to the contrary. You can stop posts to an unmoderated newsgroup if they have been cross-posted.
Go away. Please. You are wasting everyone's time. Actually, at this point, by replying to you, I'm wasting folks time. I'll not comment further. Feel free to have the last word.
I suppose everybody knows "Mein Kampf" but no need to wrap the message. Guy Macon, a NAZI indeed.
Editting messages is the bloody limit. He should be hanged by his balls for this, shot in the neck, cut into little pieces and further processed in his own salami sausage factory.
--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove \'q\' and \'invalid\' when replying by email)
...would be, if not for the fact that it isn't true.
I do thank you and Bob Stephens, though. Accusing someone of editing messages, being a Nazi, etc. is an excellent example of why someone who desires to have a civil discussion might wish to use a moderated m=newsgroup. The worse you act up the better getting away from you looks. Thanks!
If you are so obtuse as to believe that appending a trailer isn't 'editing', then you really have no business moderating anything. You clearly have the opportunity to edit or prohibit any post that is crossposted to your little kingdom.
Also, given your propensity for attempting to mislead people by taking quotes out of context, and then taking the position against this staged position, I'd suggest that you simply aren't trustworthy enough for this task. You have no honor.
Your methodology is flawed. If my theory is correct, then I would not expect anyone to subject themselves to abuse by doing that, and I *would* expect many of those who wish to be civil to not frequent newsgroups where off-topic flaming is an art form. The proper way to test this is to wait a while and see whether users find misc.business.product-dev to be a useful group. I would venture to say that anyone who has decided that they don't like it before it has even started is unlikely to be a constructive contributer anyway.
Reject, yes. Accept, yes. Add moderator's comment, yes. Edit the content, no. You just made that up out of whole cloth, presumably because you can't think of any real objections to make.
No thanks. I already have a Usenet newsgroup.
Liar. I don't "edit people's posts."
Wrong again. I don't mind you making stuff up about policies/motivations, but you are embarassing yourself when you make up things in technical areas.
Look at the path of a couple of posts in sci.electronics.design. The path header tells you which machines it went through. Now look at the path of a couple of posts in misc.business.product-dev. Depending on how close your system is to a major carrier, the number of machines may be fewer. If you are far from a major carrier, your post will skip past a series of NNTP servers by taking a SMTP hop directly to the main STUMP server. The difference either way is a matter of a few seconds, of course, but that doesn't matter to someone who makes things up, does it?
The word explicit fits better than transparent.
"Caught" doing something that I clearly explained in my first post...
Nope. Just pointing out one of your many technical blunders. Read your post. Read the post you replied to. You made a claim about unmoderated newgroups by quoting a cection about moderated newsgroups.
Just pointing out another technical blunder.
And you know this - how? Let me guess; you hear something about a group that is just starting and which has an ongoing discussion with the early-adopters about moderation policy, and through your psychic ability you determine what the policy will settle down to be. Then you flame me for this imaginary policy, mixed in with the occasional technical blunder, mix in a few blatant lies, and imagine that you have accomplished something.
I will leave you with a direct quote from a recent misc.business.product-dev post"
"Yeah, on SED I typically stop reading a thread after 10-20 posts, because they've left the subject far behind. I don't have time to waste on the posturing and strutting that goes on too often.
"Usually I'll glance at an occasional message in a long-running thread, and once in a long while I'll find that someone has either gone off onto a different, but interesting, topic, or returned to the original thread.
"Then I'll have to dig back into the archives to see if there's anything worth digging out.
"I always wonder whether I missed something good, but I can't spend all day every day reading trash, hoping to find something worthwhile.
"So I'm an enthusiastic advocate of your idea, Guy."
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.