Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 07:45:28 -0500 Message-Id: <199703031245.HAA17469@delorie.com> From: DJ Delorie To: eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com In-reply-to: (message from Eli Zaretskii on Mon, 3 Mar 1997 13:09:07 +0200 (IST)) Subject: Re: c.o.m.djgpp retro-moderated? > Is this at all realistic? I mean, do we have a volunteer? (And no, I > *don't* volunteer, sorry.) IMHO, the burden of moderation is quite > high, and unless we have somebody who is willing to devote the > resources without causing significant slow-down of the turn-around, I > think this discussion is a bit academic. You're thinking about a moderated newsgroup. Retro-moderation is different. R-M allows someone to cancel a post because of content, but only after people start seeing it. If the R-M's do nothing, the list continues as it has (as nothing gets canceled), with no changes and no performance loss. R-M will allow some people to cancel spams and anti-spam followups, instead of just ignoring them. If an off-topic thread gets to the point where someone has to jump in and yell "ENOUGH!" then future articles on that thread probably should be canceled also. R-M also lets us modify postings that are cross-posted to include a follow-up to an appropriate newsgroup. Technically, we could do any of these now, since they require no configuration changes to the news servers. However, it's not a Good Thing unless the charter is changed to reflect it. Doing it officially gives someone the right to handle the extreme cases, rather than just hope they go away.