Re: [RANT] Death of Usenet: Film at 11

[tob@world.std.com (Tom Breton)]

frantz@netcom.com (Bill Frantz) writes:
> At  1:34 PM 8/19/96 -0700, Mike Duvos wrote:
> >
> Moderated newsgroups gain reputation from their moderation policies and
> probably should not be included in this scheme.

Actually, this was hashed out a long time ago on the late, lamented
news.future. I'm pleased to see ideas I fought for coming to life again.

Moderation could easily fit in. A moderation-stamp would be just one
more field for the search to work with. Someone (I think it was me but
it's been years since all this was said!) speculated that this would
actually be an improvement in several ways:

* If rejected messages were indicated by simply missing a signature of
approval, voluntary not searched for by individual readers, it would be
harder to claim moderator censorship. Or to accomplish it, for that
matter.

* Multiple independent moderators could work on the same newsgroup.

* If the stamp of approval were dissociated from the message proper,
messages could propagate without waiting for the moderator's
receive-email-and-post cycle. The moderator's "OK" would catch up later,
for those readers that wait for it.


Imminent resurrection of Usenet predicted. Film-teaser at 5.

        Tom