Full support here. I'll co-moderate if it isn't time consuming, or too
techno-difficult. Derek, Solo? Maybe K30 would come back? Nick? Gail?
Galen? Phyllis/Jim? G Pierce? Bill, DavidM? ~ jan

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 13:25:40 -0500, wrote:

I've spent several more hours doing research.
Here is a ( brief?) update. (It turned out longer than I
intended. Please try to read through all of it. I've repeated a lot
of those things that are critical.)

The main control group (Big-8 Usenet org) that actually creates
new groups has recently changed their methods. There is no longer
any public voting (which allowed all kinds of fraud and abuse.)
This is a __very__ good thing, which will be a definite plus in
getting a moderated group going..

Basicly, 4 things need to happen.

1. First, publicize the fact that a new moderated group may be
formed if there is enough interest. We need to spred the word to
former rec. ponders. Their positive imput will be very helpful (see
step 3 below.)

2. An RFD (request for discussion) has to be written and
submitted. This should also include a FAQ giving all necessary
reasons and details. This __must__ also include a list of
persons who agree to act as moderators.

3. The Big-8 Usenet organization puts the FAQ and RFD on a
newly created newsgroup and opens it up for discussion.
The new group is " news.groups.proposals ". It is
moderated and was just created on 11-18-06. Your news provider
may/probably does not carry it yet. Please ask them to carry it.
All discussion pro/con __must__ take place on that group. After
your news provider starts to carry it, you will need to subscribe to
it. And let former rec.ponders know about it. Their imput will be
a huge help in getting the Big-8 group to authorize creation.

This new group (news.groups.proposals) is run by and
moderated by the big-8, and they will filter out all posts that come
from trolls, have flames or abusive language, or invalid email
addresses. They are VERY familiar with the more well-known usenet
trolls, and will filter them out. What gets through should be an
honest picture of the desire to have a new rec.ponds.moderated group.

4. After a length of time, the Big-8 Board will review all the
discussion and will vote on whether to allow the creation of a new
rec.ponds.moderated group..
(There is no longer a public CFV -call for vote--, and that will
stop the trolls from "stuffing the ballot box". A VERY good thing.)


Until recently the Big-8 had a different method of creating
groups, and it tended to favor fraud and abuse. It also had voting
rules that made many honest people reluctant to vote in favor of a
new group. ALL THAT HAS NOW CHANGED. The voting is now internal,
amongst the members of the Big-8 board.

What need to be done now?

1. I will be spending the next 5-7 days learning more about all
the details. I'll report back here occassionally with updates.

2. First and foremost, we need to have a group of long-term,
trusted, genuine rec. ponders who will consider acting as moderators.
These persons will have a lot of power in judging which posts go
through, which need editing, and which get thrown out.
IF YOU ARE A RECOGNIZED, WELL-KNOWN, GENUINE, LONG-TERM PONDER,
WILL YOU CONSIDER HELPING OUT? No firm commitments are needed until
all the facts & details are worked out and ready for submission.

3. I need to do more research on the various software programs
that act as robo-moderators. These programs do the first interception
of all posts and filter out the obvious trolls, junk, abuse,
off-topic, cross-posted, etc. posts. A robo-moderator program will
also intercept and kill any troll who decides to flood the moderators
with hundreds or thousands of posts. This will greatly reduce the
workload for the moderators.

I have a lot of work to do in the coming week, or more. All I
need to know is,...do I have the support of genuine rec.ponders who
truly love the subject of this group, and want to see it survive?

Its true that there is already a moderated group on google, but
I don't care for google groups. I would much prefer a usenet group.
Also, the google group has aquaria posts, and goes well beyond the
original intended focus of the rec.ponds group.

As a last note, I would be willing to act as a co-moderator, but
in truth I'm not a good choice. I am an unknown, and loyal
rec.ponders can't be sure of my motives, or know what I might do as a
moderator.
My intentions are very honest and sincere. But most, if not
all, co-moderators need to be recognized, loyal, long-term, neutral
ponders who can be trusted to make judgements on what goes through and
what gets blocked. I want to help, and will help if allowed, but I'm
not a good choice, at least not at this time. Simply because you
really don't know me or my track record..

Anyways, I'll stop for now.

I'm going back to do more research. But I need to hear feedback
from the people who love the subject of this group.

Is there support for this project? Can we get a group of
potential co-moderators who would be willing to help out (provided
that things are set up so that they don't get swamped with work.)
At this point, I think that a robo-moderator, plus 3-4-5 co-moderators
should be sufficient to spred the workload out.)

I'll be checking back to see what the reaction is to this post.
If there is no support, then I'll drop the project and move on.

But I don't want the subject of this group to die. And I think
it will die if something drastic isn't done.

__Genuine__ rec.ponders.........how do you feel about all this?

george (not my real name)
-----------------

Also ponding troll free at:
http://groups.google.com/group/The-Freshwater-Aquarium