Default User said:
This is pretty dopey. If you don't like the moderation policies of a
moderated newsgroup or forum, don't use it. There are certainly no
shortage non-moderated newsgroups on various topics.
I don't think moderators should alter posts in any way. Accept or
reject are the only sensible avenues.
I don't see any problem with doing something like:
Original title: C++ Scandal?!
Moderated title: [Moderated] C++ Scandal?!
A better solution than a separate group I think. The separate group would
only be required to allow posters their 5th amendment rights when the
"moderators" were actually suppressing thoughts by not allowing posts
within a group. Seeing all rejected/moderated posts would give more
insight as to what the group is. Not being allowed to see those posts is
cause for suspicion.
What, all posts from EVERY moderated comp newsgroup on usenet? All
mixed together in a bucket, eggs on top, don't skimp on the pate? Silly.
Obviously I didn't think one group for all moderated posts was doable either:
that's why I implied at some smaller granularity (comp.moderatedposts).
You don't really seem to have much of an idea.
Your entitled to your opinion. I think it's a valid and topical issue in general
and not just because I've been "moderated". Unchecked moderation has
potential undesireable aspects that the unnitiated can fall prey to.
What happened, get some
posts canned and now you're all in a huff about it?
I don't "get in a huff". But it's certainly something that has me saying "hmm.."
at this point.
Grow up, that's my
advice.
You should "grow up" by not trying to suppress dialog in threads where YOU
don't wish to discuss. Examine your own behavior above.
Moderating a newsgroup is about the most thankless task I can
imagine on usenet, I wouldn't touch that job with 1024 foot pole. If
you don't like clc++m, just post here. Take your chances.
Ted