Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/03/03/02:58:11
In article <19970302 DOT 202634 DOT 4767 DOT 1 DOT chambersb AT juno DOT com>,
chambersb AT juno DOT com (Benjamin D Chambers) writes:
>
> On Mon, 03 Mar 1997 01:31:09 +0100 Francois Charton
> <deef AT pobox DOT oleane DOT com> writes:
>>Is it worth the bother? There are extremely few off-topic threads,
>>which
>>do not represent a threat for the group.
>
> As I understand it, messages would be deleted _after_ they were sent (I
> can only comment on the mailing list, I never have {and likely never
> will} used NG's). If that's the case, then the only thing affected will
> be the compilation of the list, which is (I believe) on DJ's server.
> Since it's his server, his list, and his port, I say let DJ do whatever
> he wants with it.
As I understand it, what DJ proposes is to moderate the USENET
*newsgroup*, not the mailing list. Of course DJ has every right to do
whatever he pleases with his email gateway. The newsgroup does not
use any of DJ's personal resources.
In fact, a moderated mailing list is probably a *very* good idea.
This would allow the list subscribers to follow an abridged version of
the newsgroup discussions while those who follow the USENET newsgroup
would have access to the unmoderated discussions that take place
there. A mailing list digest of the current discussions would
probably interest many as well. The only problem with this is that it
is a nontrivial amount of work for someone (IMHO this is true of any
fair moderation scheme).
--Jesse
- Raw text -