| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
I am posting on behalf to the moderation team for rec.ponds.moderated
to invite all rpm posters to help fund the moderation software for the group. It costs $360 per year to rent the ReadyStump software that is used to moderate posts to RPM. The 2007 cost was covered by donations and it is time to collect money to cover 2008. All RPM posters and visitors are invited to contribute toward the cost of moderation. You can make donations in two ways: 1. by PayPal at the following location: http://rpm.chipin.com/moderation-sof...pondsmoderated This address will also show you the progress. 2. by sending a check to Dr. Jim Hurley, 5422 Clinton Blvd, Jackson, MS 39209. Make a note on the bottom corner that it is for RPM software. We will keep you posted on progress toward our goal of $360. Thank you. Jim Hurley for the RPM Moderation Team |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
"Phyllis and Jim" wrote in message ups.com... I am posting on behalf to the moderation team for rec.ponds.moderated to invite all rpm posters to help fund the moderation software for the group. It costs $360 per year to rent the ReadyStump software that is used to moderate posts to RPM. The 2007 cost was covered by donations and it is time to collect money to cover 2008. All RPM posters and visitors are invited to contribute toward the cost of moderation. You can make donations in two ways: 1. by PayPal at the following location: http://rpm.chipin.com/moderation-sof...pondsmoderated This address will also show you the progress. 2. by sending a check to Dr. Jim Hurley, 5422 Clinton Blvd, Jackson, MS 39209. Make a note on the bottom corner that it is for RPM software. We will keep you posted on progress toward our goal of $360. Thank you. Jim Hurley for the RPM Moderation Team why? |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
"jthread" wrote:
"Phyllis and Jim" wrote in message [ . . . ] All RPM posters and visitors are invited to contribute toward the cost of moderation. You can make donations in two ways: 1. by PayPal at the following location: http://rpm.chipin.com/moderation-sof...pondsmoderated This address will also show you the progress. 2. by sending a check to Dr. Jim Hurley, 5422 Clinton Blvd, Jackson, MS 39209. Make a note on the bottom corner that it is for RPM software. [ . . . ] why? Who should pay? Those who volunteer to do the moderation or those who benefir from their efforts? Although I've become primarily a lurker, I greatly appreciate the SPAM and flame absence here. I don't follow every thread, but enjoy the ones I do, and when I think I have something of value to add, I do. When I've asked a question, I've gotten worthwhile answers or suggestions. I'm also keenly aware that my encouragement played some small part in getting this group started. It's an INVITATION to contribute! Those who can't, or don't wish to, aren't going to get blackballed. I can't afford to donate much, these days, but I've mailed a nominal check to Jim. I thank the moderators for performing yeoman duty to the betterment of ponding worldwide. The soapbox is now empty. Next! -- Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their families! I've known US vets who served as far back as the Spanish American War. They are all my heroes! Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~ |
Update: Paying for the moderation software for RPM - $90 donated
We have reached $90 toward the $360 we need for the moderation
software for 2008. Thanks to the donors. Whether or not you can help out with the costs, ENJOY RPM! Jim Hurley Administrative moderator |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
jthread wrote:
"Phyllis and Jim" wrote in message ups.com... I am posting on behalf to the moderation team for rec.ponds.moderated to invite all rpm posters to help fund the moderation software for the group. It costs $360 per year to rent the ReadyStump software that is used to moderate posts to RPM. The 2007 cost was covered by donations and it is time to collect money to cover 2008. All RPM posters and visitors are invited to contribute toward the cost of moderation. You can make donations in two ways: 1. by PayPal at the following location: http://rpm.chipin.com/moderation-sof...pondsmoderated This address will also show you the progress. 2. by sending a check to Dr. Jim Hurley, 5422 Clinton Blvd, Jackson, MS 39209. Make a note on the bottom corner that it is for RPM software. We will keep you posted on progress toward our goal of $360. Thank you. Jim Hurley for the RPM Moderation Team why? rec.ponds.moderated runs on a hosted machine using software that costs money - the annual cost of this is $360 - this money doesn't appear by magic it needs to be funded. On set up the bulk of this money was provided by the sponsor of this group and some of the moderators but it is unfair to expect people who are giving their time to moderate this group to also shoulder the financial burden of funding the group, which is to the benefit of all wishing to discuss ponds and related subjects.....contributions, however small, will help to keep this group going mainly because every little helps.....it doesn't matter if the donation is a few cents or mega dollars or nothing at all.....but if we want the group to continue then some members do need to help out with the financing of it...... Gill Speaking for herself and not the RPM moderation team |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
Gill Passman wrote:
jthread wrote: "Phyllis and Jim" wrote in message [ . . . ] All RPM posters and visitors are invited to contribute toward the cost of moderation. You can make donations in two ways: 1. by PayPal at the following location: http://rpm.chipin.com/moderation-sof...pondsmoderated This address will also show you the progress. 2. by sending a check to Dr. Jim Hurley, 5422 Clinton Blvd, Jackson, MS 39209. Make a note on the bottom corner that it is for RPM software. [ . . . ] And if, on the day of reckoning, we're still short, I'll pony up with a few bucks more, and I'm sure I won't be alone. -- Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their families! I've known US vets who served as far back as the Spanish American War. They are all my heroes! Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~ |
Update: Paying for the moderation software for RPM - $100 donated
We are now at $100 of the $360 needed for our moderation software.
You can check progress or donate at: http://rpm.chipin.com/moderation-sof...pondsmoderated Thanks to all who have donated thus far. Whether you donate or not, ENJOY RPM. Jim |
Moderation software for RPM - $210 donated
We are at $210 of the $360 we need. Thanks to all the contributors!
Jim |
Moderation software for RPM - $210 donated
On Sun, 4 Nov 2007 18:56:01 CST, Phyllis and Jim
wrote: We are at $210 of the $360 we need. Thanks to all the contributors! Jim Wow! ~ jan ------------ Zone 7a, SE Washington State Ponds: www.jjspond.us |
Moderation software for RPM - $230 donated
We are at $230 of the $360 we need. Thanks to all the contributors!
Jim |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
Phyllis and Jim wrote:
I am posting on behalf to the moderation team for rec.ponds.moderated to invite all rpm posters to help fund the moderation software for the group. It costs $360 per year to rent the ReadyStump software that is used to moderate posts to RPM. The 2007 cost was covered by donations and it is time to collect money to cover 2008. Good googly moogly! :-0 This is just advice (but keep in mind, it's advice from someone who moderates 2 other Usenet groups; rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs): Find another software program! People have been moderating newsgroups since the inception of Usenet, and doing so with free tools. Now maybe, if I were really, REALLY convinced that a particular tools was really good, I might see paying a ONE TIME FEE for a program. But even that ONE TIME FEE would be less than what this program is costing. PS: I use a Listserv (tm - www.lsoft.com) email list as my moderation tool. Besides being free (since the software is already hosted here at my school), it allows non-usenet folks to participate by creating an email mirror. -- + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Chris Barnes AOL IM: CNBarnes Yahoo IM: chrisnbarnes "Usenet really is all about standing around and hitting the ground with clubs, on a spot where many years earlier a dead horse lay." |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 10:25:04 CST, Chris Barnes
wrote: Phyllis and Jim wrote: I am posting on behalf to the moderation team for rec.ponds.moderated to invite all rpm posters to help fund the moderation software for the group. It costs $360 per year to rent the ReadyStump software that is used to moderate posts to RPM. The 2007 cost was covered by donations and it is time to collect money to cover 2008. Good googly moogly! :-0 This is just advice (but keep in mind, it's advice from someone who moderates 2 other Usenet groups; rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs): Find another software program! People have been moderating newsgroups since the inception of Usenet, and doing so with free tools. Now maybe, if I were really, REALLY convinced that a particular tools was really good, I might see paying a ONE TIME FEE for a program. But even that ONE TIME FEE would be less than what this program is costing. PS: I use a Listserv (tm - www.lsoft.com) email list as my moderation tool. Besides being free (since the software is already hosted here at my school), it allows non-usenet folks to participate by creating an email mirror. I realize moderation has been going on for some time, and that the ideal solution would be to do the whole thing without paying a cent. There are few programs out there that are suitable for a bunch of folks moderating a newsgroup. The fact that there are several moderators precludes using a system set up for only one. ISP constraints and "lag time," or the time between when a post is made and when in actually appears after moderation tend to work against any email type scheme. These and some other constraints have pretty much forced us to go with a web-based program for moderation. That requires a "front end" to the program which can deal with most of the spam and other stuff that a moderated group is subject to, the moderation tool available to moderators, and an "aft end" to the program which packages the approved posts into a format handled by various servers for newsgroups. Furthermore, someone has to be responsible for keeping the host machine(s) running, be technically able to troubleshoot problems, and be able to handle the (sometimes unfounded) complaints of its users. We have been able to find only one (1) package that meets these requirements, and it is not free. If you (or anyone) knows of a cheaper program, or perhaps a free program and someone willing to host it, please write us about it. My email address is at the bottom of this message, a post about the program to rec.ponds.moderated will just as surely reach us, or email addresses of other moderators are published here. I, for one, think it would be a great idea, we just haven't been able to find one. I speak only for myself, but I'll bet most (if not all) the other moderators would indeed be very interested. -- Galen Hekhuis "Mistakes were made" |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
Galen Hekhuis wrote:
PS: I use a Listserv (tm - www.lsoft.com) email list as my moderation tool. Besides being free (since the software is already hosted here at my school), it allows non-usenet folks to participate by creating an email mirror. I realize moderation has been going on for some time, and that the ideal solution would be to do the whole thing without paying a cent. There are few programs out there that are suitable for a bunch of folks moderating a newsgroup. The fact that there are several moderators precludes using a system set up for only one. ISP constraints and "lag time," or the time between when a post is made and when in actually appears after moderation tend to work against any email type scheme. Listserv has a web interface. I use it daily for the admin/moderator tasks. PS: We have had multiple moderators on rec.hunting since 1992 (when I took over) using Listserv. -- + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Chris Barnes AOL IM: CNBarnes Yahoo IM: chrisnbarnes "Usenet really is all about standing around and hitting the ground with clubs, on a spot where many years earlier a dead horse lay." |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
"Galen Hekhuis" wrote in message ... (brevity snips) My email address is at the bottom of this message, a post about the program to rec.ponds.moderated will just as surely reach us, or email addresses of other moderators are published here. I, for one, think it would be a great idea, we just haven't been able to find one. =========================== You can ask about free moderation software on alt.comp.freeware. -- RM.... Frugal ponding since 1995. rec.ponder since late 1996. Zone 6. Middle TN USA ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 12:52:01 CST, Chris Barnes
wrote: Galen Hekhuis wrote: PS: I use a Listserv (tm - www.lsoft.com) email list as my moderation tool. Besides being free (since the software is already hosted here at my school), it allows non-usenet folks to participate by creating an email mirror. I realize moderation has been going on for some time, and that the ideal solution would be to do the whole thing without paying a cent. There are few programs out there that are suitable for a bunch of folks moderating a newsgroup. The fact that there are several moderators precludes using a system set up for only one. ISP constraints and "lag time," or the time between when a post is made and when in actually appears after moderation tend to work against any email type scheme. Listserv has a web interface. I use it daily for the admin/moderator tasks. PS: We have had multiple moderators on rec.hunting since 1992 (when I took over) using Listserv. Shucks, your server considers me to be a "spam source" if I email, so this gets posted. Far out! Who should I contact? -- Galen Hekhuis Guns don't kill people, religions do |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
I am chiming in as an individual.
Thank you, Chris, for contributing about potential software options. I am delighted that the preparation for next year's software rental fee has opened up the possibility of cost-free moderation software. I think all of the moderators would love to have no-cost software! I would like to move in a both/and direction for the moment: BOTH raise funds so we will not be without software AND see if we can get an effective free alternative. If we can get it in place before we have to pay the software use fee, good and we can refund the monies donated. If we can't get it in place fast enough, we can move ahead with rental and keep looking without leaving rpm without moderation. Jim |
Moderation software for RPM - $245 donated
Progress toward the $360 goal continues. Great! All of us benefit
from the generosity of the donors. Thanks to them, especially since they are giving at just the time when ponds are going to sleep. Jim |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
On Tue, 6 Nov 2007 02:17:20 CST, Phyllis and Jim
wrote: BOTH raise funds so we will not be without software AND see if we can get an effective free alternative. If we can get it in place before we have to pay the software use fee, good and we can refund the monies donated. If we can't get it in place fast enough, we can move ahead with rental and keep looking without leaving rpm without moderation. I like your plan and appreciate the efforts the moderation team puts forth. I can't help you select software, but if the people doing the selecting and moderating want a pay plan, I want to do my fair share to keep RPM going. -- Hal Middle Georgia, Zone 8 http://tinyurl.com/2fxzcb |
Moderation software for RPM - $270 donated
We are now at 75%.
$270 of $360 has been donated. Jim |
Moderation software for RPM - $295 donated
We are now at 81%.
$295 of $360 has been donated. Jim |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
In article
Galen Hekhuis writes: I realize moderation has been going on for some time, and that the ideal solution would be to do the whole thing without paying a cent. There are few programs out there that are suitable for a bunch of folks moderating a newsgroup. The fact that there are several moderators precludes using a system set up for only one. ISP constraints and "lag time," or the time between when a post is made and when in actually appears after moderation tend to work against any email type scheme. Um, just so you know, moderated Usenet groups are entirely based on an "email type scheme." New posts are diverted to the standard moderation email address for the group. These and some other constraints have pretty much forced us to go with a web-based program for moderation. That requires a "front end" to the program which can deal with most of the spam and other stuff that a moderated group is subject to, I will note, since you are on the threshold of paying for this again, that your selected software also has a strong tendency toward false positives with no helpful messages. I have yet to get a post through to the moderation queue. (Unless this one happens to work. I keep trying... Nope. Have to hotwire it yet again.) -- Drew Lawson And I know there's more to the story I know I need to see more I need to see s'more, hear s'more feel s'more. I gotta be s'more |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
Drew,
Have you suggestions for a reliable alternative software? Free would be great. Less would be good. Reliable essential. Jim |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
In article
Galen Hekhuis writes: On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 14:37:18 GMT, (Drew Lawson) wrote: Um, just so you know, moderated Usenet groups are entirely based on an "email type scheme." New posts are diverted to the standard moderation email address for the group. I am aware of that. What I was trying to say (unsuccessfully in this case) is that there are several email based moderation schemes, as opposed to web based moderation schemes. It is the moderation, not the operation of the newsgroup, which makes use of email for moderation undesirable in this particular application. Gotcha. That got clearer to me in some of the additional posts. I will note, since you are on the threshold of paying for this again, that your selected software also has a strong tendency toward false positives with no helpful messages. I have yet to get a post through to the moderation queue. (Unless this one happens to work. I keep trying... Nope. Have to hotwire it yet again.) This is one of the advantages of having an unmoderated somewhat "parallel" group (rec.ponds). One can quickly determine if the problem is with the moderated group by posting identical articles to both groups (no cross-posting, as that is automatically rejected by the moderation software). Identical posts made through the same ISP at the same time should yield identical results. If the results are not the same (a post showing up in rec.ponds but not rec.ponds.moderated) one may reliably assume that something in the moderation chain is responsible. Oh, it is quite clear. I get the standard form message from devnull at whereever, telling me that I must have used prohibited words (without telling me what they are) and that I can resubmit it if I think there is an error. (I never crosspost.) Every post. I suspect that it is objecting to somethnig (still no guesses as to what) in the message headers. I'd wondered if it hated my domain name, but your post quotes that, so it probably isn't the issue. I know enough about Usenet to work around this, but I dislike doing so. So I usually just don't post. I don't like that solution, as I plan on putting a pond in this spring and may have design questions over the winter. We are currently trying to figure out and track down the problem of "missing posts." Simply saying to the operator of the server that hosts the moderation software that some of our posts are missing doesn't bode well for resolution of an intermittent problem. It would be far, far better to provide examples (complete with full headers). Mine aren't missing, just blocked/bounced. -- Drew Lawson | Radioactive cats have | 18 half-lives http://www.furrfu.com/ | |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
In article om,
Phyllis and Jim wrote: I am chiming in as an individual. Thank you, Chris, for contributing about potential software options. I am delighted that the preparation for next year's software rental fee has opened up the possibility of cost-free moderation software. I think all of the moderators would love to have no-cost software! I would like to move in a both/and direction for the moment: BOTH raise funds so we will not be without software AND see if we can get an effective free alternative. If we can get it in place before we have to pay the software use fee, good and we can refund the monies donated. If we can't get it in place fast enough, we can move ahead with rental and keep looking without leaving rpm without moderation. Jim My question would be, just how bad could an unmoderated board for ponds be? It's not political, religious or controversial, and aside from bulk spam or the occasional flamer, I don't see the value of a omderated board except to be a lot of work for someone. I subscribe to about 20 Usenet groups, and none of them are moderated. They manage to do fine. Most everyone knows how to use a killfile, anyway. Just my 2 cents. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
Drew Lawson wrote:
Um, just so you know, moderated Usenet groups are entirely based on an "email type scheme." New posts are diverted to the standard moderation email address for the group. These and some other constraints have pretty much forced us to go with a web-based program for moderation. That requires a "front end" to the program which can deal with most of the spam and other stuff that a moderated group is subject to, I will note, since you are on the threshold of paying for this again, that your selected software also has a strong tendency toward false positives with no helpful messages. I have yet to get a post through to the moderation queue. (Unless this one happens to work. I keep trying... Nope. Have to hotwire it yet again.) What you say is true, but just because the messages arrive via email does not preclude the use of a web-front end for management purposes. Thinking out loud here.... If I were to design a multi-user moderation system from scratch, I would probably start with a Linux box running postfix (for receiving email), Spamassassin (for scanning messages for spam), Squirrelmail with the Bounce Addon (a webbased email client), and INN or Dnews (usenet server software). While I'm at it, I would install Mailman too. Note that all of this is free (except the computer itself to run everything). (1) Start by setting up a regular user account (called "pondmod") for the receiving of the incoming email posts for review. Give every person on the moderation team the password to this account (note 1). (2) Create 4 additional email folders for the pondmod account: Spam, Ham, MaybeSpam, & Approved (3) create a .procmailrc script on the pondmod account which would: (a) move messages marked as spam (by spamassassin) to the MaybeSpam folder so a moderator can review them for false positives (note 2). (b) check the incoming message against a "blacklist" (containing both email addy and sender's ip addresses). If it matches, move the message to /dev/null. (c) check the incoming message against a "whitelist" (containing both email addy and sender's ip addresses). If it matches, "bounce" the message to INN for posting to the group. (4) set a crontab to run every 5 minutes where INN (or Dnews) will look in the ~pondmod/Maildir/.Approved/cur folder. For each message it finds there, add the appropriate "Approved:" tag and post to the rpm group (removing the message from the folder when it's done). (5) Do the same thing as step 4 for the messages in the Ham folder, but do NOT remove the message (yet). Instead, run "sa-learn --ham" (part of spamassassin) on the Ham folder and "sa-learn --spam" on the Spam folder. Remove the messages in both folders at the completion of this step. Note that doing this helps improve SpamAssassin's efficiency in correctly identifying spam. When one of the moderators wants to review the messages, they simply logon to the Squirrelmail webpage and look at the messages in the Inbox. To approve a message, they simply move the message to the Approved folder. If a message is in the Inbox and is spam (but not marked as spam), the moderator manually moves it to the Spam folder. The moderator then needs to look in the "MaybeSpam" folder. Move any messages which indeed are spam to the Spam folder; move any messages which are not spam (should be approved) to the Ham folder. Done this way, the task of moderating a newsgroup is no different than simply checking one's email on gmail or hotmail. Note 1: You could give every person on the moderation team their own account if you wanted to. But if you do this, you'll need to create a .procmailrc in their home directories pointing at pondmod's Maildir. You'll also have to play with the permissions of the directory to make sure they can read/write the files in that directory. Note 2: The reason for moving messages Spamassassin thinks are spam to the MaybeSpam folder, rather than just nuking them a (a) risk of false positives - 1 false positive is worse than 1000 false negatives. Said another way, you don't want to nuke legit messages. (b) as already mentioned, running sa-learn helps SpamAssassin do a better job of identifying spam in the future, resulting in lower false positive and negatives. Note 3: probably the hardest task in all of this is getting an existing usenet server to accept your server's message uploads. You'll need to find another Usenet server admin willing to accept your connections. On the other hand, you don't need to worry about getting a download feed from them at all. -- + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Chris Barnes AOL IM: CNBarnes Yahoo IM: chrisnbarnes "Usenet really is all about standing around and hitting the ground with clubs, on a spot where many years earlier a dead horse lay." |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
|
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
In article
Kurt writes: My question would be, just how bad could an unmoderated board for ponds be? Surprisingly bad. It's not political, religious or controversial, and aside from bulk spam or the occasional flamer, I don't see the value of a omderated board except to be a lot of work for someone. I'm not sure anymore who were villians and who were victims in rec.ponds, but suffice it to say that some people have a lot of energy for making trouble, or for making sure that others' fun is ruined. I subscribe to about 20 Usenet groups, and none of them are moderated. They manage to do fine. Most everyone knows how to use a killfile, anyway. Killfiles are of much less use when there is a problem with forged posting addresses. That was going on, as was some pretending to have been forged, etc. -- Drew Lawson And I know there's more to the story I know I need to see more I need to see s'more, hear s'more feel s'more. I gotta be s'more |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 12:32:33 CST, Chris Barnes
wrote: ... I didn't quote anything, I just wanted Chris to email me. I've been rejected as spam every time I try to email you. -- Galen Hekhuis Illiterate? Write for FREE help |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
"Kurt" wrote:
My question would be, just how bad could an unmoderated board for ponds be? It's not political, religious or controversial, and aside from bulk spam or the occasional flamer, I don't see the value of a omderated board except to be a lot of work for someone. I subscribe to about 20 Usenet groups, and none of them are moderated. They manage to do fine. Most everyone knows how to use a killfile, anyway. Just my 2 cents. Wow. For a preview, drop in over at rec.ponds. It used to be worse. San Diego Joe 4,000 - 5,000 Gallons. Koi, Goldfish, and RES named Colombo. |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
In article ,
San Diego Joe wrote: "Kurt" wrote: My question would be, just how bad could an unmoderated board for ponds be? It's not political, religious or controversial, and aside from bulk spam or the occasional flamer, I don't see the value of a omderated board except to be a lot of work for someone. I subscribe to about 20 Usenet groups, and none of them are moderated. They manage to do fine. Most everyone knows how to use a killfile, anyway. Just my 2 cents. Wow. For a preview, drop in over at rec.ponds. It used to be worse. I dropped in today after never having been there. Scrolled through last 2 months posts. You have the prolific cross spammer bobandcarole and a few others easily killfiled. He hit a few groups I was in a while back, but disappeared after a few emails to his news service. Amazed that he gets in that group. The rest are related. The problem I see is that many of the pond group were constantly responding to these posts. Easy solution: If they don't get attention they gradually stop posting. Don't respond. Email their news provider, don't waste time responding to their baiting. No posts in that entire group today. Using the killfile feature is really all you need. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 22:04:40 CST, Kurt wrote:
Easy solution: If they don't get attention they gradually stop posting. Don't respond. Email their news provider, don't waste time responding to their baiting. No posts in that entire group today. Using the killfile feature is really all you need. Two years of suggesting/doing the above, some just wouldn't do it or play nice. The current RP is no history of what it was a year ago. My killfile was so huge, it would have taken a ream of paper to print it off. And let's not forget the nonsense flooding that still occurs. ~ jan ------------ Zone 7a, SE Washington State Ponds: www.jjspond.us |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 12:31:08 CST, Kurt
wrote: My question would be, just how bad could an unmoderated board for ponds be? Bad enough to reduce our number of posters to a small group of very dedicated people who really like to discuss fish keeping and cause them to band together and support a moderated group. -- Hal Middle Georgia, Zone 8 http://tinyurl.com/2fxzcb |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
Hi Kurt,
I wondered the same thing when we began to have spammers and conflictual posters on rec.ponds. I enjoyed the group greatly. Take a look at rec.ponds now...or go over selected months for the last couple of years. It provides a direct answer to 'how bad'. The moderated group seems to me a wonderful alternative to the sad state of the unmoderated group. JMHO Jim My question would be, just how bad could an unmoderated board for ponds be? It's not political, religious or controversial, and aside from bulk spam or the occasional flamer, |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
Drew,
Thanks for the clarification about your problem. Galen is wiser than most of us moderators about the details of posts. Could you send him an entire rejected post so that we can check out what is getting you bounced by the software? Jim |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
In article ,
~ jan wrote: On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 22:04:40 CST, Kurt wrote: Easy solution: If they don't get attention they gradually stop posting. Don't respond. Email their news provider, don't waste time responding to their baiting. No posts in that entire group today. Using the killfile feature is really all you need. Two years of suggesting/doing the above, some just wouldn't do it or play nice. The current RP is no history of what it was a year ago. My killfile was so huge, it would have taken a ream of paper to print it off. And let's not forget the nonsense flooding that still occurs. ~ jan ------------ Zone 7a, SE Washington State Ponds: www.jjspond.us But now that group has had no posts in 2 days. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 11:51:33 CST, Kurt wrote:
But now that group has had no posts in 2 days. And it took, hmmm, 9 months for that to happen, and 1-2 years prior to that, and after, the majority of us couldn't post there without being filleted. So a handful of us banded together, and with Ron S. doing the majority of the startup work, RPM was created. Just because old RP has been quiet for 2 days does not give me confidence to go back there. Trolls do have dormancy periods. ;-) And.... sad to say, even some of our loyal ponders have sharp tongues that they think they're hiding by being witty. ~ jan ------------ Zone 7a, SE Washington State Ponds: www.jjspond.us |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
In article ,
wrote: On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 11:51:33 CST, Kurt wrote: In article , ~ jan wrote: On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 22:04:40 CST, Kurt wrote: Easy solution: If they don't get attention they gradually stop posting. Don't respond. Email their news provider, don't waste time responding to their baiting. No posts in that entire group today. Using the killfile feature is really all you need. Two years of suggesting/doing the above, some just wouldn't do it or play nice. The current RP is no history of what it was a year ago. My killfile was so huge, it would have taken a ream of paper to print it off. And let's not forget the nonsense flooding that still occurs. ~ jan ------------ Zone 7a, SE Washington State Ponds: www.jjspond.us But now that group has had no posts in 2 days. Trust me, it __would__ start again. You would need to know more about who some of our trolls were, and why they were determined to destroy the group (which they did). Have you ever used the "Agent" newsreader? If so, I could send you a rar file containing all the messages from late-2004 till late-2006. If you opened it and inserted it into Agent, you would clearly see what the problem was. No amount of kill-filtering could solve it. But what was _far_ worse, the atmosphere was so poisoned that any newcomers who dropped in were immediately driven off. Old-timers could use the medicine (kill-filters) and maybe hang on, but the community itself was so poisoned that the result was fatal. (Actually, I have most of the messages of rec.ponds packaged, going back to the late 90's -the good old days that lasted til 2005.) (In case you're wondering who I am, I helped get rpm started last fall/winter.) Ron Schompert PS: A one-year anniversary is coming up on Nov. 25th. On that day, a guy named George naively suggested the idea of starting a moderated group. I've never heard of such ferocious and consistant attacks on a group that, in theory, should lack any sort of controversy, and I've been in some pretty wild ones. The rec.ponds group had over 10,000 posts archived through my news service. Saw a lot of the usual suspects who had been cross spamming everywhere, but most were just a lot of the usual yahoos that get into every group. Guess ponders are a stranger bunch than I thought... ;-) I shy away from PCs, so I use the excellent MTNewswatcher on our Macs. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
In article . com,
Phyllis and Jim wrote: Hi Kurt, I wondered the same thing when we began to have spammers and conflictual posters on rec.ponds. I enjoyed the group greatly. Take a look at rec.ponds now...or go over selected months for the last couple of years. It provides a direct answer to 'how bad'. The moderated group seems to me a wonderful alternative to the sad state of the unmoderated group. Yes, I glanced through a few months worth. Were these good ponders gone bad? ;-) I can't imagine how that group attracted all that malice. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space" |
Paying for the moderation software for RPM
I am not sure what happened. If you review the posts after about
2005, you get a very quick idea of the hostilities and where they were focused. Others could probably describe it to you. Speaking for myself, I love having a group that is without the rancor of the trolled rec.ponds. It feels rather like the old days before the trolls. I thought they would quit when folks did not respond. Not so. I thought they would tire. Not so. The goal was very much to destroy the group. That brought the attacking of everything. Jim |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:58 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter