A minimally moderated versionof this newsgroup

Having an unmoderated newsgroup for a subject such as sci.electronics.basics
is, at first glance, a good idea. Anyone can post to the group, ask any
question and get,, hopefully, useful answers.

But the group is dominated by a few individuals who instantly descend to
personal abuse should anyone disagree with them. This is not what the group
should be about.

What this group should be is one of the most useful and informative sources
of information for beginners in electronics available. But all to often it
resembles a squabble in a kindergarten, with posters using language to each
other which would get them fired from any responsible company.

This does nothing to further the reason for the group's existence and is a
remarkably stupid waste of bandwidth.

For these reasons I am considering starting a moderated version of this
newsgroup.

The moderation rules will be simple and are designed to allow a lively and
informative forum without recourse to swearing and the trading of personal
invective such as have cursed this group for far too long:

Be polite,

No personal insults,

Facetious and unhelpful replies will not be posted,

Threads which wander off topic will be welcome as long as they are
interesting and informative,

Off topic posts will be allowed and welcome as long as they have some
relevance to electronics and the teaching of electronics to newcomers to the
subject,

Totally off topic posts, such as "The correct way to post to a newsgroup"
(!) will be completely banned,

Those who refuse to abide by the rules, which basically come down to "Keep
it interesting, informative and polite" will be warned via a personal
e-mail. If such a poster still does not find it possible to be interesting,
informative and polite, he will be warned in public.

A failure to behave sensibly after that will ensure his banning from the
group.

The rules, such as they are, will not be enforced in any draconian fashion.
Use of four letter words will be tolerated as long as their use is relevant.
One of my own favourite expressions to describe something absolutely
useless, for example, is "As much use a s tits on a fish!"

I realise that there will be those among you, probably the worst offenders
with regard to the misuse of this forum, who will vociferously object to
this idea. However, that same freedom of speech which allows you to misuse
this newsgroup to trade hissy fits allows me to start a group should I so
choose and moderate it in any way I see fit, especially if that moderation
is for the furtherance of the basic purpose of a group such as
sci.electronics.basics.

Those of you who would be interested in such a group can contact me directly
or via this group. In any case, I'm going to take the necessary steps
toward the creation of such a group.

John

"Baphomet" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "John Fortier" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:Gixib.29628$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> snip...snip...snip...
>
> > Those of you who would be interested in such a group can contact me
> directly
> > or via this group. In any case, I'm going to take the necessary steps
> > toward the creation of such a group.
>
> Great idea John. Although some of the off topic posts can be entertaining
as
> well as informative, they tend to wear thin and get tedious rather
quickly.
> I would suggest that as long as the forum is going to be moderated, you
> encourage attachments as some of the posts are rather unclear without an
> accompanying schematic. I think we could all live without the cheesy and
> confusing ASCII approximations.
>
>

Thanks, Baphomet, I was hoping that you would be willing to come on board.
With your permission, I'll e-mail you direct with some ideas for the board.

Regards

John

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:57:10 GMT, "John Fortier"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Having an unmoderated newsgroup for a subject such as sci.electronics.basics
>is, at first glance, a good idea. Anyone can post to the group, ask any
>question and get,, hopefully, useful answers.
>
>But the group is dominated by a few individuals who instantly descend to
>personal abuse should anyone disagree with them. This is not what the group
>should be about.

---
But, like it or not, in reality it _is_ what the group is about.
---


>What this group should be is one of the most useful and informative sources
>of information for beginners in electronics available. But all to often it
>resembles a squabble in a kindergarten, with posters using language to each
>other which would get them fired from any responsible company.

---
Perhaps, but this _isn't_ a responsible company and, in truth, much of
the company here _is_ irresponsible.
---

>This does nothing to further the reason for the group's existence and is a
>remarkably stupid waste of bandwidth.

---
As is complaining when screaming to high heaven will do no good.
---

>For these reasons I am considering starting a moderated version of this
>newsgroup.

---
Good luck!
---

>The moderation rules will be simple and are designed to allow a lively and
>informative forum without recourse to swearing and the trading of personal
>invective such as have cursed this group for far too long:
>
>Be polite,
>
>No personal insults,
>
>Facetious and unhelpful replies will not be posted,
>
>Threads which wander off topic will be welcome as long as they are
>interesting and informative,

---
To you...
---

>Off topic posts will be allowed and welcome as long as they have some
>relevance to electronics and the teaching of electronics to newcomers to the
>subject,
>
>Totally off topic posts, such as "The correct way to post to a newsgroup"
>(!) will be completely banned,

---
How about "A minimally moderated versionof this newsgroup"?^)
---

>Those who refuse to abide by the rules, which basically come down to "Keep
>it interesting, informative and polite" will be warned via a personal
>e-mail.

---
Be careful; that can be construed as invasion of privacy.
---

>If such a poster still does not find it possible to be interesting,
>informative and polite, he will be warned in public.
>
>A failure to behave sensibly after that will ensure his banning from the
>group.

---
Why don't you simply put the matter before the group (which would, of
course, be off-topic) and ask for votes. After all, you're really not
the arbiter of taste and the grouyp would, ostensibly, be fir the
enjoyment of the members...
---

>The rules, such as they are, will not be enforced in any draconian fashion.
>Use of four letter words will be tolerated as long as their use is relevant.

---
That's a ****ing relief!
---

>One of my own favourite expressions to describe something absolutely
>useless, for example, is "As much use a s tits on a fish!"

---
In the same vein, would "As much use as tits on a Nun" be tolerated?
---

>I realise that there will be those among you, probably the worst offenders
>with regard to the misuse of this forum, who will vociferously object to
>this idea.

---
Not me! I think it's a great idea since it'll probably get your up-tight
ass (arse?) out here (just kidding, Sarge!-), but I think it'll be
doomed to failure.
---

>However, that same freedom of speech which allows you to misuse
>this newsgroup to trade hissy fits allows me to start a group should I so
>choose and moderate it in any way I see fit,

---
SIEG HEIL!
---

>especially if that moderation
>is for the furtherance of the basic purpose of a group such as
>sci.electronics.basics.
>
>Those of you who would be interested in such a group can contact me directly
>or via this group. In any case, I'm going to take the necessary steps
>toward the creation of such a group.

---
Good for you!

As a start, you may want to check:

http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html

or Google "creating a newsgroup" without the quotes.

Good luck. Really.

--
John Fields

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:57:10 GMT, "John Fortier"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Having an unmoderated newsgroup for a subject such as sci.electronics.basics
>is, at first glance, a good idea. Anyone can post to the group, ask any
>question and get,, hopefully, useful answers.
>

Moderated newsgroups tend to have very low activity levels; some I've
seen are lucky to get one post per day. This is because of the delays
associated with moderating, and because the off-topic posts and
occasional squabbling actually give the group personality. Moderators
tend to become fatheads, sending long critiques to would-be posters
instead of just letting them post and learn. A newsgroup isn't a
peer-reviewed scientific journal - it's a community. And a community
needs a little nuttiness to keep it interesting.

If you don't like a poster or a thread, just ignore it. Most news
readers allow one to review the subject lines without downloading the
whole post, so bandwidth isn't a real issue even for people who still
dial up.

John

Hi John,

My £0.02.

As a long-time lurker and occasional poster, I think this
group is not too bad as it is (S.E.D. can be much worse.) I can
live with the foul-mouthed idiots (as given time they usually
self-destruct) but wouldn't want to do so with someone else's
system of technical review.

Having said that, there are two areas that annoy me slightly.
One is where an off-topic reply to a posting develops into the
main thread such that the question posed isn't properly dealt
with. And the other, the frequent lack of feedback from posters
especially when the person replying has gone to some trouble on
their behalf.

The best of luck in your quest for the well-tempered group.


Cheers - Joe

"John Larkin" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:57:10 GMT, "John Fortier"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Having an unmoderated newsgroup for a subject such as
sci.electronics.basics
> >is, at first glance, a good idea. Anyone can post to the group, ask any
> >question and get,, hopefully, useful answers.
> >
>
> Moderated newsgroups tend to have very low activity levels; some I've
> seen are lucky to get one post per day. This is because of the delays
> associated with moderating, and because the off-topic posts and
> occasional squabbling actually give the group personality. Moderators
> tend to become fatheads, sending long critiques to would-be posters
> instead of just letting them post and learn. A newsgroup isn't a
> peer-reviewed scientific journal - it's a community. And a community
> needs a little nuttiness to keep it interesting.
>
> If you don't like a poster or a thread, just ignore it. Most news
> readers allow one to review the subject lines without downloading the
> whole post, so bandwidth isn't a real issue even for people who still
> dial up.
>
> John
>
>

The idea here, John, is to have a group which stays, more or less, on
subject. I'm semi retired and will have sufficient time to manage the
group.

On top of that, moderated groups which are not moderated by control freaks
tend to have good responses. The moderation won't be on a posting by
posting basis and will only come into effect should someone start to abuse
the group's ethos. Slanging matches will probably develop but the slangers
will be asked to stop, then told to stop, and then banned. Only those who
are so stupid as to think that moderation doesn't apply to them will suffer.

Any comments I may post will be separate from any ongoing thread and will, I
hope, leaven the subject with humour and humanity.

In other words, I'll try to keep pomposity to a minimum.

For example, and I think this is on topic, (barely), I just heard this one:
What were the last words of the Redneck electrical engineer?

"Hey boys, look what happens when I touch both of them!"

Further by the way, Dilbert fans will be welcome.

John

"John Fortier" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Gixib.29628$(E-Mail Removed)...

snip...snip...snip...

> Those of you who would be interested in such a group can contact me
directly
> or via this group. In any case, I'm going to take the necessary steps
> toward the creation of such a group.

Great idea John. Although some of the off topic posts can be entertaining as
well as informative, they tend to wear thin and get tedious rather quickly.
I would suggest that as long as the forum is going to be moderated, you
encourage attachments as some of the posts are rather unclear without an
accompanying schematic. I think we could all live without the cheesy and
confusing ASCII approximations.

John Larkin ((E-Mail Removed)) writes:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:57:10 GMT, "John Fortier"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Having an unmoderated newsgroup for a subject such as sci.electronics.basics
>>is, at first glance, a good idea. Anyone can post to the group, ask any
>>question and get,, hopefully, useful answers.
>>
>
> Moderated newsgroups tend to have very low activity levels; some I've
> seen are lucky to get one post per day. This is because of the delays
> associated with moderating, and because the off-topic posts and
> occasional squabbling actually give the group personality. Moderators
> tend to become fatheads, sending long critiques to would-be posters
> instead of just letting them post and learn. A newsgroup isn't a
> peer-reviewed scientific journal - it's a community. And a community
> needs a little nuttiness to keep it interesting.
>
So often over the years, the people who so badly want to create
new spaces don't have a grasp on how the spaces work. I imagine
one reason is that they come to newsgroups, don't like what they
see, and without spending time there, decide a new space is
what's needed.

What they don't realize is that they may make a space for beginners,
but they also may lose the oldtimers, the ones who have knowledge of
the topic and knowledge of the space.

I suspect this planned "newsgroup" is going to be not a newsgroup,
ie it will be some web-based forum, or one of those commercially based
mailing lists.

Making spaces is downright easy, getting participants is a whole
different matter.

I sure have no interest in moving to another space, and I imagine
that's the case for the long term posters here, the ones who
are most likely to be there with an answer for a beginner.

It is amusing to see some of these new spaces, because they lack
so much activity. Over at http://www.poptronics.com they have
a couple of web-based forums, and not only does the site specifically
say "We realize that the traditional newsgroups aren't always the
best source for information" but the people who hang out there say
the same thing. Yet, they get a few messages a week, if that many,
and barely do questions get replies. Community is messy, yet it
is that very chaos that allows for plenty of answers, and questions.


Michael

John Fortier wrote:
> Having an unmoderated newsgroup for a subject such as sci.electronics.basics
> is, at first glance, a good idea. Anyone can post to the group, ask any
> question and get,, hopefully, useful answers.

Yes, and I think that they usually do get useful answers in this group.

> But the group is dominated by a few individuals who instantly descend to
> personal abuse should anyone disagree with them. This is not what the group
> should be about.

I haven't really noticed that problem in this newsgroup, yes people
disagree sometimes (as I am doing now) but personal abuse is, in my
opinion, quite rare in this group.

> What this group should be is one of the most useful and informative sources
> of information for beginners in electronics available.

I think it is, and many very knowledgeable and helpful people post here.

> But all to often it
> resembles a squabble in a kindergarten, with posters using language to each
> other which would get them fired from any responsible company.
> This does nothing to further the reason for the group's existence and is a
> remarkably stupid waste of bandwidth.

You don't have to read posts that you don't like and most newsreaders
can be configured to block particular posters, though you will still get
the replies to their abusive messages so that isn't entirely satisfactory.

> For these reasons I am considering starting a moderated version of this
> newsgroup.

[SNIP]

Sounds like a good idea but I am not sure that it will be practical.

> Totally off topic posts, such as "The correct way to post to a newsgroup"
> (!) will be completely banned,

I too find those types of thread annoying, but I simply didn't read it.

[SNIP]

>
> Those of you who would be interested in such a group can contact me directly
> or via this group. In any case, I'm going to take the necessary steps
> toward the creation of such a group.

If you are willing to put in the effort to do this then I would be
interested, but I don't see the problem with this group.

Good luck,

Gareth.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
To reply to me directly:

Replace the text after the@symbol with: totalise DOT co DOT uk

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, John Larkin wrote:
>
>Moderated newsgroups tend to have very low activity levels; some I've
>seen are lucky to get one post per day. This is because of the delays
>associated with moderating, and because the off-topic posts and
>occasional squabbling actually give the group personality. Moderators
>tend to become fatheads, sending long critiques to would-be posters
>instead of just letting them post and learn. A newsgroup isn't a
>peer-reviewed scientific journal - it's a community. And a community
>needs a little nuttiness to keep it interesting.
>
>If you don't like a poster or a thread, just ignore it. Most news
>readers allow one to review the subject lines without downloading the
>whole post, so bandwidth isn't a real issue even for people who still
>dial up.

I think we can have some sort of mild form of moderation that does not
require human action on most posts...

The original proposal was for consequences of offenses being privately
e-mailed warnings, posted warnings for further offenses, then banning.
This sounds to me like posts will not have to be approved prior to
posting.

One idea I have: Since the original plan is for posts to automatically
go through unless from banned individuals, it may help to have a
robomoderator. The robot would scan posts for signs from being from
heavily offending individuals, based on things like words/phrases used
mainly by them. Should "flagged" posts be from or appearing likely to be
from individuals "already on probation", such posts would be submitted to
a group of human moderators, any of which can approve the post. This
means the post goes through unless all of the human moderators reject it.

As for which newsgroups: I think this should apply not just for
sci.electronics.basics, but also sci.electronics.design and
sci.electronics.misc. I would vote for such a degree of moderation of
these groups themselves, or else encourage migration to some newly created
sci.electronics.moderated. I do think that .basics, .design, and .misc
won't be too bad to combine into one group.

- Don Klipstein ((E-Mail Removed), http://www.misty.com/~don/index.html)