"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 5/9/07 08:58, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

snip

I've only used Google groups in the past when something has gone awol with
my news reader or something of that sort. It is - or was - a very
cumbersome way to post and read, IMO. And of course, it's wide open to
sock
puppet use.

But it is (or was) possible, I believe, to set up a moderated Google Group
with posting restricted to 'approved' personnel only. This was adopted, in a
case I am familiar with, by refugees from a newsgroup, who were no longer
prepared to tolerate some vicious 'infighting' between factions on the
newsgroup, the idea being members could discuss matters between themselves
without the unpleasantness which had set in.

On 5/9/07 11:33, in article , "BAC"
wrote:


"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 5/9/07 08:58, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

snip

I've only used Google groups in the past when something has gone awol with
my news reader or something of that sort. It is - or was - a very
cumbersome way to post and read, IMO. And of course, it's wide open to
sock
puppet use.

But it is (or was) possible, I believe, to set up a moderated Google Group
with posting restricted to 'approved' personnel only. This was adopted, in a
case I am familiar with, by refugees from a newsgroup, who were no longer
prepared to tolerate some vicious 'infighting' between factions on the
newsgroup, the idea being members could discuss matters between themselves
without the unpleasantness which had set in.



As far as I can see, anyone can do that now. The problems I've heard of
with moderated groups is agreeing on who gets to be moderator and finding
someone willing to undertake the task. Do they never go on holiday? ;-))
--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove weeds from address)
'We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our
children.'

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 5/9/07 08:58, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

snip

I've only used Google groups in the past when something has gone awol
with
my news reader or something of that sort. It is - or was - a very
cumbersome way to post and read, IMO. And of course, it's wide open to
sock
puppet use.

But it is (or was) possible, I believe, to set up a moderated Google Group
with posting restricted to 'approved' personnel only. This was adopted, in
a case I am familiar with, by refugees from a newsgroup, who were no
longer prepared to tolerate some vicious 'infighting' between factions on
the newsgroup, the idea being members could discuss matters between
themselves without the unpleasantness which had set in.
I have one of those. I call it an "email".

I wonder if it will catch on?

On 5 Sep, 11:33, "BAC" wrote:
But it is (or was) possible, I believe, to set up a moderated Google Group
with posting restricted to 'approved' personnel only. This was adopted, in a
case I am familiar with, by refugees from a newsgroup, who were no longer
prepared to tolerate some vicious 'infighting' between factions on the
newsgroup, the idea being members could discuss matters between themselves
without the unpleasantness which had set in.

Yes it is possible, it's called 'restricted' - it says 'people must be
invited to join the group. Only members can post messages, read the
archives, view the members list, create pages and upload files. The
group and its archives do not appear in public Google search results
or the directory'. That's really restricted. Not really a good idea
for the exchange of ideas and advices with 'new blood' - maybe good
for a group of people wanting to share minutes/meeting dates and
events, like one group I'm in Manchester, a permaculture group, you
get people's email addy when you meet them and then add them in the
group but you can't just 'get in' like this. It's only for the purpose
of staying in touch and having all the info in one 'file/directory'
instead of communicating via emails. Works for us.

"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 5/9/07 11:33, in article , "BAC"
wrote:


"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 5/9/07 08:58, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

snip

I've only used Google groups in the past when something has gone awol
with
my news reader or something of that sort. It is - or was - a very
cumbersome way to post and read, IMO. And of course, it's wide open to
sock
puppet use.

But it is (or was) possible, I believe, to set up a moderated Google
Group
with posting restricted to 'approved' personnel only. This was adopted,
in a
case I am familiar with, by refugees from a newsgroup, who were no longer
prepared to tolerate some vicious 'infighting' between factions on the
newsgroup, the idea being members could discuss matters between
themselves
without the unpleasantness which had set in.



As far as I can see, anyone can do that now. The problems I've heard of
with moderated groups is agreeing on who gets to be moderator and finding
someone willing to undertake the task. Do they never go on holiday? ;-))

I can't say. I joined it initially, since I didn't want to lose touch with
some of the posters, but stopped using it after a very short while, because
it was just so cumbersome and unwieldy in comparison with the plain vanilla
newsgroup.

"Uncle Marvo" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 5/9/07 08:58, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

snip

I've only used Google groups in the past when something has gone awol
with
my news reader or something of that sort. It is - or was - a very
cumbersome way to post and read, IMO. And of course, it's wide open to
sock
puppet use.

But it is (or was) possible, I believe, to set up a moderated Google
Group with posting restricted to 'approved' personnel only. This was
adopted, in a case I am familiar with, by refugees from a newsgroup, who
were no longer prepared to tolerate some vicious 'infighting' between
factions on the newsgroup, the idea being members could discuss matters
between themselves without the unpleasantness which had set in.
I have one of those. I call it an "email".

I wonder if it will catch on?


Hopefully not, I get enough junk in mailwasher and in my webmail inbox as it
is.

On 5/9/07 13:40, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 11:50:40 +0100, Sacha
wrote:

On 5/9/07 11:33, in article , "BAC"
wrote:


"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 5/9/07 08:58, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

snip

I've only used Google groups in the past when something has gone awol with
my news reader or something of that sort. It is - or was - a very
cumbersome way to post and read, IMO. And of course, it's wide open to
sock
puppet use.

But it is (or was) possible, I believe, to set up a moderated Google Group
with posting restricted to 'approved' personnel only. This was adopted, in a
case I am familiar with, by refugees from a newsgroup, who were no longer
prepared to tolerate some vicious 'infighting' between factions on the
newsgroup, the idea being members could discuss matters between themselves
without the unpleasantness which had set in.



As far as I can see, anyone can do that now. The problems I've heard of
with moderated groups is agreeing on who gets to be moderator and finding
someone willing to undertake the task. Do they never go on holiday? ;-))

You can have several moderators who can take it in turns to have nervous
breakdowns/vacations/screaming fits.

At it's simplest the moderators just restrict who has access to the group.

It works for some groups but seems to lead to rather stilted 'conversation',
IMO.

--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove weeds from address)
'We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our
children.'

wrote in message
ups.com...
On 5 Sep, 11:33, "BAC" wrote:
But it is (or was) possible, I believe, to set up a moderated Google
Group
with posting restricted to 'approved' personnel only. This was adopted,
in a
case I am familiar with, by refugees from a newsgroup, who were no longer
prepared to tolerate some vicious 'infighting' between factions on the
newsgroup, the idea being members could discuss matters between
themselves
without the unpleasantness which had set in.

Yes it is possible, it's called 'restricted' - it says 'people must be
invited to join the group. Only members can post messages, read the
archives, view the members list, create pages and upload files. The
group and its archives do not appear in public Google search results
or the directory'. That's really restricted. Not really a good idea
for the exchange of ideas and advices with 'new blood' - maybe good
for a group of people wanting to share minutes/meeting dates and
events, like one group I'm in Manchester, a permaculture group, you
get people's email addy when you meet them and then add them in the
group but you can't just 'get in' like this. It's only for the purpose
of staying in touch and having all the info in one 'file/directory'
instead of communicating via emails. Works for us.


Works fine for a group I am in where we meets all over the country, cruise,
12 of us flew out to Barbados for a 14 night cruise :-) and in October have
our own Dinner Dance. 77 Booked in so far :-))

There is a secret. No one 'owns or feels they own' the newsgroup/forum :-))
Private messages are taken to email and only 'public' matters or matters
which are NOT a 'one to one backwards and forwards conversation' between two
people, are on the air. Watch this newsgroup and see what I mean.

Kind regards

Mike



--
The Royal Naval Electrical Branch Association.
'THE' Association if you served in the Electrical Branch of the Royal Navy
www.rneba.org.uk to find your ex-Greenie mess mates
www.iowtours.com for all ex-Service Reunions. More being added daily
"Navy Days" Portsmouth 25th - 27th July 2008. RN Shipmates will have a Stand

On 5/9/07 15:42, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

snip

You can have several moderators who can take it in turns to have nervous
breakdowns/vacations/screaming fits.

At it's simplest the moderators just restrict who has access to the group.

It works for some groups but seems to lead to rather stilted 'conversation',
IMO.

The two I use are quite animated. One has in excess of 600 subscribers.

Good grief - poor moderator/s!
--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove weeds from address)
'We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our
children.'

On 5/9/07 16:50, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 16:12:19 +0100, Sacha
wrote:

On 5/9/07 15:42, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

snip

You can have several moderators who can take it in turns to have nervous
breakdowns/vacations/screaming fits.

At it's simplest the moderators just restrict who has access to the group.

It works for some groups but seems to lead to rather stilted
'conversation',
IMO.

The two I use are quite animated. One has in excess of 600 subscribers.

Good grief - poor moderator/s!

They don't do anything except control membership.

No sneaky socks creeping then? I can think of people who would think it
funny to try to do that.
--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove weeds from address)
'We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our
children.'

"Martin" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 16:12:19 +0100, Sacha

wrote:

On 5/9/07 15:42, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

snip

You can have several moderators who can take it in turns to have
nervous
breakdowns/vacations/screaming fits.

At it's simplest the moderators just restrict who has access to the
group.

It works for some groups but seems to lead to rather stilted
'conversation',
IMO.

The two I use are quite animated. One has in excess of 600 subscribers.

Good grief - poor moderator/s!

They don't do anything except control membership.
--

Martin


The thing is that with a membership without those causing trouble and
stirring things up in an aggressive manner, there is very little to do. It
would be a good idea, and I have mentioned it before, for this newsgroup to
be moderated and I am quite certain that certain antagonistic members would
soon be banned or told to control their contributions.

Mike


--
The Royal Naval Electrical Branch Association.
'THE' Association if you served in the Electrical Branch of the Royal Navy
www.rneba.org.uk to find your ex-Greenie mess mates
www.iowtours.com for all ex-Service Reunions. More being added daily
"Navy Days" Portsmouth 25th - 27th July 2008. RN Shipmates will have a Stand

The thing is that with a membership without those causing trouble and
stirring things up in an aggressive manner, there is very little to do. It
would be a good idea, and I have mentioned it before, for this newsgroup
to be moderated and I am quite certain that certain antagonistic members
would soon be banned or told to control their contributions.

Mike

Easier said than done. I moderated a group once. The problem is always where
to draw the line. Exchanges can get heated but still civilised. However, it
is easy with the English language to imply a subtle slur or insult to
someone. If all such posts were deleted then there would be complaints the
moderation was too strict and people abandon the group. The group then dies.
However, letting such post through means the person on the receiving end
then typically replies with a little less subtlety and the exchange
degenerates into a slanging match with a dispute over who started it. A
moderators job is an impossible one. Wherever you draw the line people are
not happy.

There is a group here in France that is so heavily moderated that most
members have left. The group boasts over 9000 members but in reality there
are less than 50 active. The rest have had so many posts deleted they have
given up on the group (me included!) - and I don't even insult anyone!

David.

"Anne Jackson" wrote in message
...
The message from "'Mike'" contains these words:

Watch this newsgroup and see what I mean.

The _one_ thing I keep watching for, in this newsgroup, is for
YOU to post something remotely connected to *gardening*!

--
AnneJ


and do you learn from my gardening posts? I am not too much of an expert,
but I do give good advice and help where I can. For example I gave offers of
Lilly of the Valley the other day. Didn't see you rushing up to take up my
offer :-)) Bay Trees grow like weeds in our garden and I have offered those
too. (Three urglers have visited us when visiting the Isle of Wight and
taken seedlings so things do happen off screen, but then emailing should be
more common to some posters than it is)

As Shaw Taylor said 'Keep em peeled'

Kindest possible regards

Mike


--
The Royal Naval Electrical Branch Association.
'THE' Association if you served in the Electrical Branch of the Royal Navy
www.rneba.org.uk to find your ex-Greenie mess mates
www.iowtours.com for all ex-Service Reunions. More being added daily
"Navy Days" Portsmouth 25th - 27th July 2008. RN Shipmates will have a Stand

"Anne Jackson" wrote in message
...
The message from "'Mike'" contains these words:

The two I use are quite animated. One has in excess of 600
subscribers.

Good grief - poor moderator/s!

They don't do anything except control membership.

The thing is that with a membership without those causing trouble and
stirring things up in an aggressive manner, there is very little to do.
It would be a good idea, and I have mentioned it before, for this
newsgroup
to be moderated and I am quite certain that certain antagonistic members
would soon be banned or told to control their contributions.

I would class _you_ amongst the 'antagonistic members' of this group.

If it was a moderated group, that means that _you_ would be banned!

--
AnneJ


Sweetie Pie you say the sweetest things :-))

Kindest regards

Mike
xxx



--
The Royal Naval Electrical Branch Association.
'THE' Association if you served in the Electrical Branch of the Royal Navy
www.rneba.org.uk to find your ex-Greenie mess mates
www.iowtours.com for all ex-Service Reunions. More being added daily
"Navy Days" Portsmouth 25th - 27th July 2008. RN Shipmates will have a Stand

On 5 Sep, 17:52, Anne Jackson wrote:
If it was a moderated group, that means that _you_ would be banned!

C'mon Anne, be honest, Mike isn't the only one posting on this group
and not talking about gardening issues. And he is not the only one who
is constantly poking either. Mike is terribly upset about the
treatment he has had here - but he has always remained polite. He is
an example of tolerance, he really is.