Yet you haven't thought of forming a private clubhouse somewhere else?
....
Perhaps you're missing the point. YOU DON'T GET TO VOTE.
You should thank him for posting as now you know you're asking for something that you will not get.
Gee, what a surprise. Not.
Once a newsgroup was changed from unmoderated to moderated. The problems from that action continue to this day. Every news admin knows this so no news admin is going to switch an existing unmoderated newsgroup to moderated. It's not going to happen. So if there's an RFD to do that it doesn't matter if it goes through the process and it doesn't matter how the board votes. It's a failed request from the gate. No one has to like that but it is part of how UseNet works and a part of UseNet history. Request all you like it's not going to happen. It won't happen because it can't happen and it can't happen because the time it was attempted was a disaster. News admins remember snad won't do it again.
Members of the board have tried to point out that history and the problems of it. I don't think they've been nearly explicit enough in this - It isn't going to happen no matter how well formed the RFD and no matter how much support it gets from the users. On UseNet the news admins hold final veto on any newsgroup change, addition or subtraction. And the news admins will definitely veto this if the board sends a control message asking for it.
If you want a moderated newsgroup go ahead and go through the RFD process to create one. Creating a moderated group is a long winded process to get it carried at the largest site but it does work. What's needed for a moderated group is someone to come forward with a server to host it and the software to do the moderation (or someone to front the money for a paid site) and an agreed upon moderation team and policy. Having read through this discussion no one has stepped forward with a single one of those requirements. No one has stepped forward as a long term moderator who will also be willing to work with potential posters who are paying customers at each large NSP to get the group carried. Even filtering robomoderators don't work without a human pilot. Robomoderation is retromoderation so spam leaks through like a sieve and trolls all get a first post.
Writing as someone who has gone through the process of creating a moderated group and who is a moderator on a couple of groups I can tell you the important parts are getting together a team to moderate and to work with NSPs, getting a server or paid service, getting the software. Get those under your belt and come back ready to go. Don't bother with the impossible of converting to moderated because it's not going to happen. Go with a new group named something like CCS.moderated or punt. Then, and only then, go into the RFD process with a thick skin. With all that preparation it won't be as harsh as this discussion but it will be a long winded process to go through. The board's vote and the control message aren't even the half way point as then the discussions with NSPs for propagation start. They say stuff is worth what you pay for it, and getting a newsgroup in the Big-8 is expensive. But you need to know what's involved, what can be done, what can't be done, what's needed before you start.
I am a moderator for news.groups.proposals speaking for myself not for the moderation team. I am not a member of the Big 8 Management board and I have attempted (probably without success) to not sound like I'm speaking for them. I am not a news admin and while I did predict their actions with a great deal of certainty "past performance is no guarantee of future performance" but I sure don't see even one news admin in this discussion stated he'd be willing to change the moderation flag of any existing unmoderated newsgroup.
Then this isn't a Usenet issue. A moderated group won't help them. Let them set up a non-Usenet Google Group.
I don't understand this issue. "Boss, we use Solidworks. I need support for it. There's a nifty Usenet group but I don't have Usenet access. Can you allow Usenet access?"
Dude, DO NOT quote people without attribution.
And what problem originated with the proponent?
Has anyone actually voted NO? I've seen arguments "for" and "against" but I don't remember seeing a single "NO" vote.
As I pointed out earlier, of all the "agree" only posts three people haven't posted in this group prior to this poll, they could very well be lurkers not posters. So far the VAST majority of the group approve this proposed change.
Don't take my posts as not being in favor of changing to a moderated group. I prefer people use filters, there are free readers & news servers anyone can use to filter this group to their "individual" preferences without need for moderating.
Tom
This is a professional group, the most active posting days are work days. The issue for a lot of folks here are their companies IT policies. They have Internet access and can use Google groups but getting IT to buy and/or install software is a major hurdle.
Tom
See the very recent thread entitled "dimension/dimension lines not dark".
Somebody asked an on-topic question, received an answer, and thanked the answerer. No "thread-hijacking" occurred.
I think you're all generating a hurricane in a teacup. Your newsgroup isn't broken at all. On-topic questions receive on-topic answers.
Sorry about that. :-( Call me anything but late for dinner :-)
I think a lot of people in this group actually have the discipline to just answer the question. I recognize most of the agree people as being known contributors somewhere along the way.
I view this group over a very long time frame and can quote chapter and verse a long way back to the Deja-News days. So while someone may not be active to you if they haven't posted in the last week, I view the last five years as being recent history.
As I stated before this thread was hijacked into news.groups midstream. It was intended to only get a sense of what the community wanted. So most people, new, old or lurkers just were aware of the initial question and were raising their hands. It wasn't meant to be much of a discussion.
If we get to the RFD and vote stage then hopefully that will settle the issue.
I've read and continue to digest the Big8 website/wiki.
They could even get access to just the one group. But that'd make too much sense.
Do you realize how little sense this makes?
Ah, so he want's TWO failures.
There ya go. :)
Peter,
(Hope I got it right now.)
Jon has a history of being excluded from other forums. It is the same pattern. One moment perfectly reasonable. The next minute the same old saw is being played. On another part of this thread he again came in with his ST blather. We've all heard it, it is nearly a verbatim repetition. The fact is the software he is comparing to SolidWorks is a completely different type of product based on a very different philosophy. It would be more appropriate to compare SolidWorks with ProEngineer which has been done here. The fact is that the product Jon is talking about has either just been released or is about to be. He hasn't used it nor has anyone else so what he is so eloquently talking about is going to be vaporware for at least six months till people start to actually use it. If you look at the majority of contributors here they are either expert users on a daily basis or they are new users inexperienced with either the usenet or SolidWorks. Jon is a strange bird in that he seems to be familiar only by reading marketing literature in its various forms. Nobody has really figured out Jon or what he is after, but his posting does follow a pattern that only superficially concerns SolidWorks. I don't think we can say he benefits from the group as far as improving his Solidworks abilities. In speaking to at least one SW employee I believe SW itself has lost interest in monitoring this group. If you look at the original vote list of signers you will find about 21 SW employees right up to the CEO. Jon for one has almost single handedly gotten them uninterested. While they may not post much (look for Biassotti, Dunne, Jankowski, McEleny as exceptions). This group would like to think that SW is watching over its shoulders. SW VARS do watch this group, but many are not allowed to post. What may be minor static on other groups is a major foobar here.
TOP
On Sep 10, 1:20 pm, Peter J Ross wrote:
You are correct, this group is not as bad as others, that is part of the issue. A few posters* have managed to trash alt.machines.cnc and are beginning to do the same thing here.
We can see the thread drift (hijacking), off topic posts, personal attacks as well as copy, pasting, plagiarizing & parroting the same thing over and over and over that you can't see by skimming a few recent topics.
You also may not see the recent cross posting to kook groups which has brought a couple kooks sniffing around this one. If MO holds for this particular poster, later down the road he will cross post to political extremist groups which will bring them back to trash this one.
Right now using a news reader with filters is optional, however if the trend doesn't change it will require people to use filters.
Tom
The universe has answered.
Would you stop the nonsense? Thread drift is not hijacking. If you think it is, you had better stay off Usenet entirely for long and short threads tend to drift.
pjr has stated he reviewed 1000 messages.
We wouldn't want people to use readily available tools to improve their work day.
There you go.
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 14:46:44 -0700 (PDT), Doug Freyburger wrote in :
The original group who put the board together debated this at some length. When push came to shove, we couldn't bring ourselves to say that no group will ever be changed to moderated.
In this case, I would definitely not vote in favor of changing comp.cad.solidworks from unmoderated to moderated.
That's about as explicit as I can get.
Marty
Relax pal, just covering the bases.
You think he read 1000 messages? More likely he scanned them and since he doesn't know the subject "SolidWorks" it would be a little difficult for him to determine what is or isn't ON TOPIC.
Tom
Pre-RFD discussion is a long-standing "service" of news.groups.
As Peter said, you may be directed to post in another group for the RFD discussion. It's not necessary, and you would lose a few voices that you might find helpful.
B/
Why thank you. I didn't know I'd had a promotion.
B/
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.