Re: should we moderate comp.lang.c++
* Frank Birbacher:
werasm schrieb:
If one could have levels of moderation, for instance, lets assume in
clc++ only spam, job postings and derogatory remarks are moderated
(and not things that are (vaguely) OT), that would make things much
better already.
So you propose a human spam filter?
I agree with what seems to be Frank's point. Current news-servers,
except Google and perhaps a few new-started ones, already do the spam
filtering, as I understand it mostly via the CleanFeed filter[1]. So
currently there are three levels of moderation available for the main
C++ groups:
* clc++ unmoderated -- use Google interface.
* clc++ spam-free -- use any good news-server.
* clc++m (no spam, no job-postings, no OT, no non-English, almost
no derogatory remarks although it happens that we fail).
An additional level of moderation between the last two seems to me to be
overkill, solving a problem that IMHO isn't really a problem.
- Alf
Notes:
[1] <url:
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-5.1-Manual/manual/doc103.html#i962>.
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?