>> > Maybe we can get the name of this group changed to "Bash the USA" and
>> >then start a new modeling group - MODERATED, like rec.guns.
>> Unfortunately, I'm not crazy about the way that one is moderated. I
>> prefer to see the posts real time rather than in batches of 50-100 when
>> the moderator gets to them. It seems most of the useful discussion has
>> gone to places like RCU.
>IMHO A small price top pay for a forum that is kept on track and free of OT
>trash.
>I wonder how others feel about a similarly moderated R/C forum.
I participated in the creation of rec.autos.sport.nascar.moderated in
1998 and have acted as one of six or seven moderators since that
time.
I've been reading news:news.groups steadily since 2000. "news.groups"
is where the essential debates are held about new group proposals.
The people who run the system within which r.m.rc.air exists are
not entertaining proposals to close an active newsgroup like this.
They do accept proposals to create new, moderated newsgroups.
The new group would be named "rec.models.rc.air.moderated".
It would be a brand-new group.
r.m.rc.air unmoderated would continue to exist.
I am not interested in developing a Request for Discussion
(RFD) for r.m.rc.air.moderated. I'm just stating some facts
about how the process works if anyone wants to understand
what the options are.
If anyone is seriously interested in created a moderated newsgroup,
they should read at least six months' worth of postings in
<news:news.groups> through google. They should pay special
attention to the FAQ on the problems of newsgroup moderation
as well as to the recent (failed) rfd to created a moderated
poker discussion group (rec.gambling.poker.moderated).
Two points about RC:
I passed my HAM Technician test today, so I will shortly be
able to fly the black flag.
I'm going to go to the flying field and schmooze now.
Marty
Marty
The Natural Philosopher - 11 Jul 2004 09:49 GMT
>>>>Maybe we can get the name of this group changed to "Bash the USA" and
>>>>then start a new modeling group - MODERATED, like rec.guns.
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>
> It would be a brand-new group.
And it would fail. Advances in technology mean that if you want to e.g.
discuss a given subjct under rules, the web based fora like RCuniverse
and rcgroups are far better than a moderated group on Usenet.
Usenet is and always has been, a free for all. That's the fun of it.
It has no real central organisation. Moderated groups always fail
because they are usually one persons idea of what it should be all
about. So out goes AMA political discussions, along wth geo politics?
In addition RCuniverse and rcgroups have far more useful aspects - the
ability to post pictures, exchange private e-mails but still be
protected against SPAM etc etc.
If you want pure on topic discussions on RCmodels, that's the best place
to be.
This group serves only to act as a pointer to theose, for the serious,
or a place to say what you can't say there, for the humourous.
> r.m.rc.air unmoderated would continue to exist.
>
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>
> Marty