why can't I post in comp.lang.c++.moderated?

[rokia]

which group server do you use?


--
ÉÏÐÂÎÅ×éÀÏÊÇÓöµ½ÂÒÂ룿ij¸ö³£ÓÃÃüÁîûÓпì½Ý¼ü£¿

http://rokia.vicp.net
»ò
http://rokia.freewebpage.org

»¶Ó­ÊÔÓñ¾ÈË×¾×÷¡£ ʱ¿ÌµÈ´ýÄúµÄÅúÆÀ¡£

 

[Peter van Merkerk]

which group server do you use?

http://news.individual.net/

Keep in mind that comp.lang.c++.moderated is a moderated newsgroup. In
other words every posting there has to be approved by a moderator. As a
result it takes a while before your posting shows up in this group. If
the moderator feels that your posting is inappropriate it might be
dropped and will never appear.

 

[Andre Heinen]

why can't I post in comp.lang.c++.moderated?
which group server do you use?

See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm

 

[tom_usenet]

which group server do you use?

I've had lots of trouble before - only about 1/2 my posts seem to
produce a response from the moderation bot, and just seem to
disappear. If you want your submission to be sure to get through,
e-mail (or cc) your post to:
(e-mail address removed)
where it is treated just like a normal post. In principle, duplicate
postings are removed, so both posting and cc'ing should be ok.

Tom

 

[Tommy McDaniel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

which group server do you use?

I use Google Groups, but I don't think that matters much. The problem
with comp.lang.c++.moderated is that they have some of what I am free
in this group to call censoring Nazis moderating the group. If you
post anything there I would recommend also posting a completely
separate post with the same content to comp.lang.c++, so at least you
will not be totally silenced if one of the censors does not like what
you have to say. Unless you are responding to an existing thread that
you just can't help but respond to, I would recommend ignoring
comp.lang.c++.moderated completely and just posting here. Don't even
bother posting anything there mentioning using comp.lang.c++ instead
or even how your stuff isn't showing up there, because I have done
that multiple times and am yet to see a single one of those posts
appear (which kind of makes it hard to move a conversation to a free
forum, but such is life under censorship).

Tommy McDaniel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBCNznVB8FYP9YqDcRApGXAJ9AaTfrsOBBe2xA3qLPK9+1w0EfmwCeOBVA
GOJRdaR4CkFYM1ugKQK4EAM=
=KJyX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[tom_usenet]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



I use Google Groups, but I don't think that matters much. The problem
with comp.lang.c++.moderated is that they have some of what I am free
in this group to call censoring Nazis moderating the group.

What reasons did they give for "censoring" your posts? I doubt anyone
but you will find the reasons unreasonable...

If you

post anything there I would recommend also posting a completely
separate post with the same content to comp.lang.c++, so at least you
will not be totally silenced if one of the censors does not like what
you have to say.

Do you have an example of such a post, where the personal likes and
dislikes of a moderator rather than the moderation policy for the
group caused them to reject your post?

Unless you are responding to an existing thread that
you just can't help but respond to, I would recommend ignoring
comp.lang.c++.moderated completely and just posting here.

Most C++ gurus only read the moderated group (if they read any
groups), so if you have a guru question, you have to ask it there in
order to get the best answer. Incorrect answers here often go
unchallenged (I've noticed serious errors in posts I've made), whereas
on clc++m they generally get jumped on and corrected.

Don't even

bother posting anything there mentioning using comp.lang.c++ instead
or even how your stuff isn't showing up there, because I have done
that multiple times and am yet to see a single one of those posts
appear (which kind of makes it hard to move a conversation to a free
forum, but such is life under censorship).

Have you had explicit rejection e-mails? If you haven't, you probably
just failed to correctly post to the group, and the moderators haven't
even seen your posts. Read the advice on the website mentioned in the
footer of every clc++m posting.

IMHO, the only reason not to post to clc++m is that there is quite a
lag between the post and it appearing there. If you have a genuine on
topic question the moderators will have no problem with it (and I've
only had one post rejected in the past few years, and it was for
excessive quoting, not for the content).

Tom

 

[Fraser Ross]

Why is it that none of my posts on comp.lang.c++.moderated can be found with
google? Also why do my posts on it never have the footnote that everyone
elses posts have? Can anyone other than me see my recent post at "Base
class type name injected into derived class" on 20/7/04?

Fraser.

 

[Ali Cehreli]

http://news.individual.net/

Keep in mind that comp.lang.c++.moderated is a moderated newsgroup. In
other words every posting there has to be approved by a moderator. As a
result it takes a while before your posting shows up in this group. If
the moderator feels that your posting is inappropriate it might be
dropped and will never appear.

AFAIK, the poster will receive a message indicating the reason for the
rejection. Of course the posters with spam-protected e-mail addresses
can't receive such messages.

Ali

 

[Ali Cehreli]

I use Google Groups, but I don't think that matters much. The problem
with comp.lang.c++.moderated is that they have some of what I am free in
this group to call censoring Nazis moderating the group.

I am sorry for your troubles with comp.lang.c++.moderated, but you are
painting a completely unfair picture of that group.

comp.lang.c++.moderated is one of the best resources on C++. It is
moderated by very kind and reasonable people. Some new ideas on modern
C++ did sprout in threads on that group.

If you post
anything there I would recommend also posting a completely separate post
with the same content to comp.lang.c++, so at least you will not be
totally silenced if one of the censors does not like what you have to
say.

The moderators apply the very clear rules of that group. Did you use a
valid e-mail address when posting? Otherwise you couldn't get the
reason for the rejection.

Ali

 

[Jack Klein]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



I use Google Groups, but I don't think that matters much. The problem
with comp.lang.c++.moderated is that they have some of what I am free
in this group to call censoring Nazis moderating the group. If you

^^^^^

A Godwin!

*plonk*

 

[tom_usenet]

AFAIK, the poster will receive a message indicating the reason for the
rejection. Of course the posters with spam-protected e-mail addresses
can't receive such messages.

I believe that you can specify a valid e-mail address but get the
moderator bot not to post your real e-mail address when it forwards
your post to the newsgroup.

I think you just need to add:
X-Replace-Address
as the last line of your sig (or anywhere else on the start of a
line).

Tom

 

[Tommy McDaniel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

What reasons did they give for "censoring" your posts? I doubt anyone
but you will find the reasons unreasonable...

Based on what, unmitigated faith in what you do not know? In any case,
I do not post with my real email address, since the address I use used
to be my real one and I found out about spam real well, and while I
considered adding some munged version of my current real one to my
posts, the FAQ for the group says the moderators do not have to bother
with such stuff, so I do not bother; hence, I do not know what
specific reason they whip out for censoring me, only that it happens.

If you

Do you have an example of such a post, where the personal likes and
dislikes of a moderator rather than the moderation policy for the
group caused them to reject your post?

Read what I said above about my email. Regardless, I am sure the
reasons for censorship are always perfectly good and valid.... What is
this concept of 'bad censorship' that you speak of? Censorship is
good.

Most C++ gurus only read the moderated group (if they read any
groups), so if you have a guru question, you have to ask it there in
order to get the best answer. Incorrect answers here often go
unchallenged (I've noticed serious errors in posts I've made), whereas
on clc++m they generally get jumped on and corrected.

Now explain to me how you are going to get an answer to a question
that the moderators are free to censor away at will (yes, even despite
the infallible, always-followed-to-the-last-letter moderation policy).
And what if you do not have a "guru question" to start with, and just
want to discuss something, something that the moderators are more
likely to have their own opinion on and strike you down for? In any
case, you make it seem like comp.lang.c++ is just a bunch of
incompetent monkeys, compared to the self-appointed masters who read
comp.lang.c++.moderated. Everybody has to feel exclusive somehow. I
have found countless pieces of great information in comp.lang.c++,
without bothering with the censored version.

Tommy McDaniel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBCp9iVB8FYP9YqDcRAq4MAJ4susl9iyVasA0Fz0fhKSHOPIWGngCfegOR
eCurZ9ahltmL7c1UKDzMGaA=
=ScNG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Keith H Duggar]

I use Google Groups, but I don't think that matters much. The problem

with comp.lang.c++.moderated is that they have some of what I am free
in this group to call censoring Nazis moderating the group.

Frankly, I'm suprised you feel that way. The moderators have never
rejected one of my posts. Not a single one. And I don't think I'm
somone you could accuse of writing watered down, easy to swallow, or
otherwise "wimpy" posts. However, I never use foul or insulting
language and I proof my posts before posting to check that they are
civil and as on topic as possible. If your posts are truly being
rejected (which we can't know since you don't use a valid email) then
I would suggest a similar strategy of proofing before posting.

If you
post anything there I would recommend also posting a completely
separate post with the same content to comp.lang.c++, so at least you
will not be totally silenced if one of the censors does not like what
you have to say.

Personally, I find having two separate threads in different forums
somewhat annoying since I'm sure some people fail to notice one or the
other; I think this would be less likely if there were only a single
thread.

Unless you are responding to an existing thread that
you just can't help but respond to, I would recommend ignoring
comp.lang.c++.moderated completely and just posting here.

Wow! I couldn't disagree more. In fact, I am VERY thankful that there
is a moderated group. And, I sincerely appreciate the job the
moderators do and the fact that they take time out of what I'm sure is
a busy day to moderate the forum. Indeed, if I personally knew any of
the moderators I wouldn't hesitate to buy them a drink for all their
hard work.

A free forum has it's place but just like the web, freedom allows
anything, including huge amounts of trash and garbage, to enter. The
moderated forum is a true blessing for those seeking knowledge rather
than just information.

Indeed, I would even appreciate a comp.lang.c++.controlled group that
not only moderated civility but made sure questions were on-topic and
answers were precise and accurate. More like a dynamic FAQ if you
will. Of course I know that is probably far fetched; but, I can still
dream Of course, my posts probably WOULD be rejected occasionally
there

Keith

 

[Tommy McDaniel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Frankly, I'm suprised you feel that way. The moderators have never
rejected one of my posts. Not a single one.

The last two sentences explain the first one.

If your posts are truly being
rejected (which we can't know since you don't use a valid email) then
I would suggest a similar strategy of proofing before posting.

I write all my posts in a text editor (Kate) and read over them over
and over (in addition to running a spellchecker and such, not to
mention finally signing them) before posting them out to the public.
But I will say, however, that whether the posts are disappearing
spontaneously or due to someone clicking "delete" does not make much
of a difference with regards to posting to that group; the end effect
is exactly the same.

Personally, I find having two separate threads in different forums
somewhat annoying since I'm sure some people fail to notice one or the
other; I think this would be less likely if there were only a single
thread.

I agree with you 100%; I can attest from my recent experience that you
are completely right. The problem is when the alternative is to not
have your stuff posted at all. I have to ask myself whether it is
preferable for my posts to always appear in at least one forum or to
not appear anywhere at all sometimes (lots of times in my case), and I
prefer the former.

Wow! I couldn't disagree more. In fact, I am VERY thankful that there
is a moderated group.

So am I. I just would not use it, or recommend its use to others.

And, I sincerely appreciate the job the
moderators do and the fact that they take time out of what I'm sure is
a busy day to moderate the forum. Indeed, if I personally knew any of
the moderators I wouldn't hesitate to buy them a drink for all their
hard work.

I would probably say the same thing if it were not my posts
'disappearing.'

Indeed, I would even appreciate a comp.lang.c++.controlled group that
not only moderated civility but made sure questions were on-topic and
answers were precise and accurate. More like a dynamic FAQ if you
will. Of course I know that is probably far fetched; but, I can still
dream Of course, my posts probably WOULD be rejected occasionally
there

That does not sound bad at all. I do not know what is entailed in
getting a new group going, and you would obviously have to find some
people to control the group, but if you could arrange for it, I would
say go for it.

Tommy McDaniel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBDIOxVB8FYP9YqDcRAv6tAKCFndw7CJdk0+EAFFvoD3OfVrYcMACdFrIJ
nZJKNy3fKVggKuQ+Ao2ZoHo=
=XIzs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Jonathan Turkanis]

Indeed, I would even appreciate a comp.lang.c++.controlled group that
not only moderated civility but made sure questions were on-topic and
answers were precise and accurate. More like a dynamic FAQ if you
will. Of course I know that is probably far fetched; but, I can still
dream Of course, my posts probably WOULD be rejected occasionally
there

How would this differ from comp.lang.c++.moderated? True, post are not
rejected because they contain factual errors, but such errors a
quickly pointed out by other posters.

My main complaint with this group is the large volume of completely
off-topic posts. The boost developers list is accessible only to
people who first sign up, and each member's first post is reviewed.
Something like this would be very helpful in eliminating a lot of the
questions about proprietary libraries, hardware, language-neutral
algorithms, general object-orientation, etc.

Jonathan

 

[Jonathan Turkanis]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In any case,
I do not post with my real email address, since the address I use used
to be my real one and I found out about spam real well,

Why not use a dedicated address for posting to c.l.c++.m, and filter
out non-c.l.c++.m-related messages. The subject lines look something
like this:

reject [over quoted]
reject [by-request] #8451 (comp.lang.c++.moderated)

Not many spammer use this type of subject line.

Jonathan

 

[Tommy McDaniel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Why not use a dedicated address for posting to c.l.c++.m, and filter
out non-c.l.c++.m-related messages. The subject lines look something
like this:

reject [over quoted]
reject [by-request] #8451 (comp.lang.c++.moderated)

Not many spammer use this type of subject line.

That would not be a bad idea, except for a couple of things: one, I
hardly ever use comp.lang.c++.moderated (before I jumped in recently
to discuss garbage collection and C++/CLI, I might have never posted
there before, and as it is I may not use it again any time soon, as
discussing things with people that continually bring up the same old
crap you already discussed 40 times over and over and over and over
again gets old, to say nothing of my part of the conversation not even
appearing half the time), and two, I never mentioned anything about
wanting to know the excuses for why my posts get rejected; the fact
that they are rejected (or fall into a black hole somewhere) is all
that matters to me.

Tommy McDaniel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBDRF0VB8FYP9YqDcRAuffAJ9Tqt+iGmXJPNJleUUZPbVb2iiEngCeMT5e
YtAepi1EEdGwrOvc51pLo9k=
=SKdE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[tom_usenet]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Based on what, unmitigated faith in what you do not know?

Based on the fact that I've always found them reasonable.

In any case,

I do not post with my real email address, since the address I use used
to be my real one and I found out about spam real well, and while I
considered adding some munged version of my current real one to my
posts, the FAQ for the group says the moderators do not have to bother
with such stuff, so I do not bother; hence, I do not know what
specific reason they whip out for censoring me, only that it happens.

Read the "communication" section here:
http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm

Read what I said above about my email. Regardless, I am sure the
reasons for censorship are always perfectly good and valid.... What is
this concept of 'bad censorship' that you speak of? Censorship is
good.

Political censorship is definitely bad; I don't have particularly
strong feelings about other kinds.

Now explain to me how you are going to get an answer to a question
that the moderators are free to censor away at will (yes, even despite
the infallible, always-followed-to-the-last-letter moderation policy).

Yes, they are free to, just as with most forums (e.g. letters to
newpapers, etc.). But if you disagree with a particular bit of
"censorship", there is a complaints procedure. The fact that you're
ranting about it here just makes everyone assume that you're an idiot
who is in the wrong and knows it, since otherwise you'd take it up
formally (which would take no longer than writing these posts).

And what if you do not have a "guru question" to start with, and just
want to discuss something, something that the moderators are more
likely to have their own opinion on and strike you down for? In any
case, you make it seem like comp.lang.c++ is just a bunch of
incompetent monkeys, compared to the self-appointed masters who read
comp.lang.c++.moderated.

The people I'm referring to are generally authors of respected C++
books.

Everybody has to feel exclusive somehow. I

have found countless pieces of great information in comp.lang.c++,
without bothering with the censored version.

There are plenty of good people reading this group, but the likes of
Stroustrup, Koenig, Alexandrescu, Scott Meyers, Kanze and Kuehl (to
name a fewf), *mostly* post only in the moderated group.

Anyway, it doesn't seem to be much of a loss to anyone that you don't
bother with clc++m!

Tom

 

[tom_usenet]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Based on what, unmitigated faith in what you do not know? In any case,
I do not post with my real email address, since the address I use used
to be my real one and I found out about spam real well, and while I
considered adding some munged version of my current real one to my
posts, the FAQ for the group says the moderators do not have to bother
with such stuff, so I do not bother; hence, I do not know what
specific reason they whip out for censoring me, only that it happens.

One more point - if you're not set up to get the rejection notices,
how do you know your posts are being rejected by the moderators? I
have technical problems with my posts even getting to the moderation
software (i.e. I don't get a "received by moderation software
e-mail"), unless I cc my posts to
(e-mail address removed). Perhaps you have the same
problem...

Tom

 

[Jonathan Turkanis]

There are plenty of good people reading this group, but the likes of
Stroustrup, Koenig, Alexandrescu, Scott Meyers, Kanze and Kuehl (to
name a fewf), *mostly* post only in the moderated group.

I know you said 'mostly', but:

I've read some very interesting stuff by Stroustrup, Koenig, Kuehl,
P.J Plauger and Howard Hinant on this group. It always suprises me how
many gurus read and post here.

There's also some guy Widmer who seems to know quite a bit.

Anyway, it doesn't seem to be much of a loss to anyone that you don't
bother with clc++m!

Tom

Jonathan