Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
Someone mentioned this the other day...
I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please |
#2
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
"Tim Watts" wrote in message ... Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please where is the fun in that? ...... |
#3
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 21/06/2017 18:56, Tim Watts wrote:
Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please Nah, leave things as they are. |
#4
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
"Ash Burton" wrote in message news On 21/06/2017 18:56, Tim Watts wrote: Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please Nah, leave things as they are. yes best larf going ...tee hee |
#5
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
In message , Tim Watts
writes Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please Might as well make it a forum and take money for advertising? -- Tim Lamb |
#7
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 21/06/17 20:24, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , Tim Watts writes Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please Might as well make it a forum and take money for advertising? Ugh! Forums are horrid. |
#8
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 22/06/17 08:38, Tim Watts wrote:
On 21/06/17 20:24, Tim Lamb wrote: In message , Tim Watts writes Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please Might as well make it a forum and take money for advertising? Ugh! Forums are horrid. No, they are very very good actually. except they dont get to be quite so free speech -- Labour - a bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich people by telling poor people that "other" rich people are the reason they are poor. Peter Thompson |
#9
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 22/06/17 09:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/06/17 08:38, Tim Watts wrote: Ugh! Forums are horrid. No, they are very very good actually. except they dont get to be quite so free speech They're horrible - because I have to go to a dozen different websites with a dozen logins to get a dozen groups. Almost none (except the Spectator) have anything like a killfill. Even with more than one NNTP server, I can have a converged view in one place, one client and one set of killfill etc rules. Now, if there was a forum aggregator with a choice of client front ends, that would be my main objection gone. |
#10
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On Thursday, 22 June 2017 09:02:36 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/06/17 08:38, Tim Watts wrote: On 21/06/17 20:24, Tim Lamb wrote: Might as well make it a forum and take money for advertising? Ugh! Forums are horrid. No, they are very very good actually. except they dont get to be quite so free speech Forums are single points of failure and thus seldom last long term. Any other venue would also mean splitting this group, not a good idea. I'd rule out any separate forum. Also forums are invariably moderated to varying extents, and the nature of such moderation kills off 99% of them. As someone pointed out moderators just lose the plot 99% of times. NT |
#11
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
In article ,
wrote: Forums are single points of failure and thus seldom last long term I really don't know where you get that idea from. I read several forums - car related - which started out text only based before becoming a forum. All are still running and moderately busy. Unlike the text only side which is moribund. But all of these sort of forums are moderated in some way - if only to block spam. -- *There's no place like www.home.com * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#12
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 08:38:54 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:
We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; One mans bacon is anothers taboo... Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Are the leech sites busy? Only stuff I notice from there are the responses to ancient posts. Some people have to be willing to moderate; Who? A bacon lover (or not)? Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Getting some new blood would be nice and the younger do seem to like web based "forums" but does anybody under 30 actually do any DIY more advanced than a flatpack bookcase? Might as well make it a forum and take money for advertising? Ugh! Forums are horrid. double plus +1 Most have no proper threading, they are slow ('cause of all the eye candy), searching is frequently fruitless even if you know what you are looking for 'cause you've seen it before and you have to go trapesing round each one just in case there is something new of interest. A mailing list would be far superiour to a web based forum. -- Cheers Dave. |
#13
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 22/06/2017 09:31, Dave Liquorice wrote:
Getting some new blood would be nice and the younger do seem to like web based "forums" but does anybody under 30 actually do any DIY more advanced than a flatpack bookcase? My poll[1] shows not a single one of those who do is aware of Usenet or GG, or would dream of using them on their phones. [1] non-random, non-stratified, sample size = 3 DIY-ers -- Robin reply-to address is (intended to be) valid |
#14
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On Thursday, 22 June 2017 10:48:23 UTC+1, Robin wrote:
On 22/06/2017 09:31, Dave Liquorice wrote: Getting some new blood would be nice and the younger do seem to like web based "forums" but does anybody under 30 actually do any DIY more advanced than a flatpack bookcase? yes they do. Far less than our generations, but yes. My poll[1] shows not a single one of those who do is aware of Usenet or GG, or would dream of using them on their phones. [1] non-random, non-stratified, sample size = 3 DIY-ers Yep, no youngster wants anything to do with a text only medium. It's nowhere near loaded with all the distracting crap they require. None are willing to try it to discover that it's only the garbage that's gone. If we have a portal maybe it could allow posting pics, then a fair number of posts here would direct people to it. FWIW those links might also appear on the home owners hub site, or whatever it's called. NT |
#15
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
"Robin" wrote in message ... On 22/06/2017 09:31, Dave Liquorice wrote: Getting some new blood would be nice and the younger do seem to like web based "forums" but does anybody under 30 actually do any DIY more advanced than a flatpack bookcase? My poll[1] shows not a single one of those who do is aware of Usenet or GG, or would dream of using them on their phones. Posting on Usenet, even assuming somebody knows about it at all involves jumping through two further hoops as compared with posting on a web portal. Even explaining to someone the difference between a news server and a news reader is difficult enough, never mind trying to persuade them to subscribe to the one, and then install the second. Basically as with a lot of things when a second best solution is given to people on a plate, very few people are going to take the trouble to look for anything better. And in any case as NT has pointed out, nowadays its very difficult to argue that a text based medium based on 8 bit ASCII is in any way superior to one providing hi-res pictures or youtube videos of fluffy kittens at the click of a mouse. michael adams .... |
#16
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
In article ,
Robin wrote: On 22/06/2017 09:31, Dave Liquorice wrote: Getting some new blood would be nice and the younger do seem to like web based "forums" but does anybody under 30 actually do any DIY more advanced than a flatpack bookcase? My poll[1] shows not a single one of those who do is aware of Usenet or GG, or would dream of using them on their phones. [1] non-random, non-stratified, sample size = 3 DIY-ers Usenet was never universally liked either. Or indeed ever used by plenty early computer types. -- *Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#17
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 22/06/2017 08:38, Tim Watts wrote:
On 21/06/17 20:24, Tim Lamb wrote: In message , Tim Watts writes Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please Might as well make it a forum and take money for advertising? Ugh! Forums are horrid. While in many cases true, its what many people know these days, and hence having one *in addition* to the the usenet group (which is mirrored both ways) might not be a bad thing. That way if you want access in the current way you still have it. In some ways it seems like a natural extension of the faq / wiki site. -- Cheers, John. /================================================== ===============\ | Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk | |-----------------------------------------------------------------| | John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk | \================================================= ================/ |
#18
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On Thursday, 22 June 2017 11:21:44 UTC+1, John Rumm wrote:
On 22/06/2017 08:38, Tim Watts wrote: On 21/06/17 20:24, Tim Lamb wrote: In message , Tim Watts writes Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please Might as well make it a forum and take money for advertising? Ugh! Forums are horrid. While in many cases true, its what many people know these days, and hence having one *in addition* to the the usenet group (which is mirrored both ways) might not be a bad thing. That way if you want access in the current way you still have it. In some ways it seems like a natural extension of the faq / wiki site. I don't believe that splitting this group with a forum would be a good move at all. But perhaps one could present a ukdiy portal that's as easy to access as a forum. Easier in fact,by not splitting it into lots of different sub-areas. NT |
#19
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 22/06/2017 14:27, wrote:
On Thursday, 22 June 2017 11:21:44 UTC+1, John Rumm wrote: On 22/06/2017 08:38, Tim Watts wrote: On 21/06/17 20:24, Tim Lamb wrote: In message , Tim Watts writes Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please Might as well make it a forum and take money for advertising? Ugh! Forums are horrid. While in many cases true, its what many people know these days, and hence having one *in addition* to the the usenet group (which is mirrored both ways) might not be a bad thing. That way if you want access in the current way you still have it. In some ways it seems like a natural extension of the faq / wiki site. I don't believe that splitting this group with a forum would be a good move at all. But perhaps one could present a ukdiy portal that's as easy to access as a forum. Easier in fact,by not splitting it into lots of different sub-areas. I was not suggesting splitting at all - quite the reverse; providing a more accessible interface to the group that we control and configure. -- Cheers, John. /================================================== ===============\ | Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk | |-----------------------------------------------------------------| | John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk | \================================================= ================/ |
#20
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 08:38:54 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:
On 21/06/17 20:24, Tim Lamb wrote: In message , Tim Watts writes Someone mentioned this the other day... ====snip==== Opinions please Might as well make it a forum and take money for advertising? Ugh! Forums are horrid. +1 (AoL, if you prefer). :-( Many years ago, when Zetnet sold out to that asset stripping company, Breathe Networks Ltd (Spit!), its dispersed membership tried to sustain the community of "Zetnutters" that had been created by that ISP's closed newsgroups with a zetnet forum created during zetnet's death throes as BNL ineptly buggered up zetnet's USP (slowly on account BNL's technical staff seemed to be a bunch of ignorant ****wits - I got an extra 12 months use out of zetnet's news server for free before it was given the final coupé de grace). During that final troubled year, I joined the zetnet users' forum to get help with 'work-around' solutions to accessing the USP of zetnet's news server. I found it such a pain to log into just this one forum that more or less as soon as BNL had finally killed off the news server, I gave up trying to stay in touch with my fellow zetnutters. Quite frankly, I can't understand how some folk manage to stay subscribed to more than two or three such fora without 'cheating' by simplifying/automating their 'secure' login procedures, let alone getting to grips with the rather klunky and disparate navigation algorithms employed. Usenet and the various client news reader software may not be a perfect solution but at least it scales well, unlike the web browser accessed fora, each with their own peculiar login and navigation requirements which don't (scale, that is!). The idiot posters and trolls aren't really a problem for those of us with enough common sense to make good use of the kill filter file (and the 'ignore thread' file if your news reader client has such an option). Failing all that, it's easy enough to ignore the postings of trolls and idiots and the urge to make a 'Knee Jerk Response' in a futile attempt to 'educate the idiots and trolls' of 'the truth'. As one of my friends, decades ago, was so fond of saying, "It's like trying to educate pork.". This business of dealing with idiots and trolls might seem like a lot of hard work - it isn't - but trying to participate in more than two or three web fora is even more 'hard work' imho. And, what's worse is that many of the discussions of a 'technical nature' have contributors who would by comparison make the likes of Rod Speed and TNP look like geniuses!!! Who'd have thought! :-( When you've been directed to as many such 'technical fora' in my googling for solutions to various computer related problems as I have over the past decade or more, you soon learn 'to bite your lip' as you realise the futility of even trying to contribute a myth busting fact to any of these fora. It's been good training in how to make best use of usenet. :-) Moderation might seem like a solution to the problem of idiots and trolls but, quite frankly, this 'cure' can often turn out to be worse than 'the disease'. After all, there's no guarantee that the moderators will be any less ill informed or opinionated than the idiots and trolls it's meant to keep at bay. It's far better, imho, to retain the "Valour is the better part of discretion." principle in the hands of the individual contributors rather than leave this in the hands of a select elite. -- Johnny B Good |
#21
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 22/06/2017 13:36, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 08:38:54 +0100, Tim Watts wrote: On 21/06/17 20:24, Tim Lamb wrote: In message , Tim Watts writes Someone mentioned this the other day... ====snip==== Opinions please Might as well make it a forum and take money for advertising? Ugh! Forums are horrid. +1 (AoL, if you prefer). :-( Quite frankly, I can't understand how some folk manage to stay subscribed to more than two or three such fora without 'cheating' by simplifying/automating their 'secure' login procedures, let alone getting to grips with the rather klunky and disparate navigation algorithms employed. Usenet and the various client news reader software may not be a perfect solution but at least it scales well, unlike the web browser accessed fora, each with their own peculiar login and navigation requirements which don't (scale, that is!). +1 However I also accept that we are missing potential contributors because we don't have a (good) web based way of accessing the group for those that are not familiar with usenet etc. If you have the web then you need to retain the newsgroup to keep all players happy. The idiot posters and trolls aren't really a problem for those of us with enough common sense to make good use of the kill filter file (and the 'ignore thread' file if your news reader client has such an option). Failing all that, it's easy enough to ignore the postings of trolls and idiots and the urge to make a 'Knee Jerk Response' in a futile attempt to 'educate the idiots and trolls' of 'the truth'. As one of my friends, decades ago, was so fond of saying, "It's like trying to educate pork.". aka "Don't try and teach a pig to sing, it will only upset the pig and frustrate you!" Dealing with the spam and common trolls is easy enough (I find simply have a filter to mark their posts as "read" is adequate most cases, with the occasional kill sub thread for a few). However dealing with the general petulance of some posters who historically were capable of posting interesting content is a slightly more tricky proposition. ISTM that having a much greater flow of of new (at least loosely) "on topic" content would go a long way to help. Even the most die hard "my os/political party/religion/choice of sandpaper is superior to all yours" type can usually make a decent conversation once they forget to climb on their personal soap box. I don't see that we will find many of them by attracting new posters to usenet. This business of dealing with idiots and trolls might seem like a lot of hard work - it isn't - but trying to participate in more than two or three web fora is even more 'hard work' imho. And, what's worse is that many of the discussions of a 'technical nature' have contributors who would by comparison make the likes of Rod Speed and TNP look like geniuses!!! Who'd have thought! :-( When you've been directed to as many such 'technical fora' in my googling for solutions to various computer related problems as I have over the past decade or more, you soon learn 'to bite your lip' as you realise the futility of even trying to contribute a myth busting fact to any of these fora. It's been good training in how to make best use of usenet. :-) ;-) Moderation might seem like a solution to the problem of idiots and trolls but, quite frankly, this 'cure' can often turn out to be worse than 'the disease'. After all, there's no guarantee that the moderators will be any less ill informed or opinionated than the idiots and trolls it's meant to keep at bay. It's far better, imho, to retain the "Valour is the better part of discretion." principle in the hands of the individual contributors rather than leave this in the hands of a select elite. Indeed, and also in this day and age one takes the risk of no longer being seen as a "common carrier" if you have moderation in place, and then someone moans that you did not moderate something (they think) you should have. -- Cheers, John. /================================================== ===============\ | Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk | |-----------------------------------------------------------------| | John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk | \================================================= ================/ |
#22
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 22/06/2017 08:38, Tim Watts wrote:
Ugh! Forums are horrid. Mr shouty sold MoneyStupid.com or whatever it was called for a nice big sum. |
#23
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
|
#24
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On Wednesday, 21 June 2017 19:31:05 UTC+1, Tim Watts wrote:
Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please If you just decide on yes/no for individual posters, there's far less moderating work. Let the group vote rather than decide personally. I want 10 no votes for Rodney NT |
#25
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
Tim Watts wrote:
Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please No need for that. It will turn into uklm where everybody has watch what they say and be nicey-nicey. As for new blood, it's too late for that. More or less the same people post here all of the time - there is nothing wrong with that as this is quite an active group. Leave well alone. |
#26
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 20:48:24 +0100, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
As for new blood, it's too late for that. More or less the same people post here all of the time - there is nothing wrong with that as this is quite an active group. Leave well alone. Tend towards agreeing with you, Mr. P. Groups that go moderated become rather like pubs after the smoking ban came in: cleaner but noticeably soul-less and sterile. |
#27
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 23/06/17 22:50, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 20:48:24 +0100, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: As for new blood, it's too late for that. More or less the same people post here all of the time - there is nothing wrong with that as this is quite an active group. Leave well alone. Tend towards agreeing with you, Mr. P. Groups that go moderated become rather like pubs after the smoking ban came in: cleaner but noticeably soul-less and sterile. I am also reminded of as society I once joined years ago, all were despondent about the falling membership and wanted 'new blood'.. so I proposed going online and appealing to a much broader marklet. They accused me of trying to take it over and destroy the 'matey' nature of it all. I left in disgust. People don't really want what they say they want. When socialists got what they asked for the labour party did not vanish, they found something else to complain about instead. Whining fills the empty hours... -- Any fool can believe in principles - and most of them do! |
#28
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 24/06/2017 05:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I am also reminded of as society I once joined years ago, all were despondent about the falling membership and wanted 'new blood'.. I wonder if its the same one as I once belonged to which resisted the use of email and electronic documentation for many years after it was common place? It really was a mind set from the top of the organisation of 'We've always used quill pens so why the need to change'? so I proposed going online and appealing to a much broader marklet. They accused me of trying to take it over and destroy the 'matey' nature of it all. One of the proposals for this group is a web based solution but if you want new participation you really need an interface to "social media" Apps which the younger generation have grown up with. -- mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk |
#29
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 27/06/17 08:29, alan_m wrote:
On 24/06/2017 05:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote: I am also reminded of as society I once joined years ago, all were despondent about the falling membership and wanted 'new blood'.. I wonder if its the same one as I once belonged to which resisted the use of email and electronic documentation for many years after it was common place? It really was a mind set from the top of the organisation of 'We've always used quill pens so why the need to change'? so I proposed going online and appealing to a much broader marklet. They accused me of trying to take it over and destroy the 'matey' nature of it all. One of the proposals for this group is a web based solution but if you want new participation you really need an interface to "social media" Apps which the younger generation have grown up with. My point was that whatever you do to UK d-i-y to change it will er - change it. Frankly I cant imagine any of today's smartphone gazing ear plug ignoring generation even so much as lifting a screwdriver. shrug -- "Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold." ۥ Confucius |
#30
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
In message , alan_m
writes On 24/06/2017 05:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote: I am also reminded of as society I once joined years ago, all were despondent about the falling membership and wanted 'new blood'.. I wonder if its the same one as I once belonged to which resisted the use of email and electronic documentation for many years after it was common place? It really was a mind set from the top of the organisation of 'We've always used quill pens so why the need to change'? so I proposed going online and appealing to a much broader marklet. They accused me of trying to take it over and destroy the 'matey' nature of it all. One of the proposals for this group is a web based solution but if you want new participation you really need an interface to "social media" Apps which the younger generation have grown up with. The only forum I read is TFF (the farming forum). Sadly, from my point of view, threads there move too quickly for someone only reading once per day. (Office based PC and used to the relaxed timescale of usenet). I sneered at Facebook when my daughters were signing up as being too intrusive and potentially dangerous for information mining. One day I will graduate to an i-phone but not yet:-) -- Tim Lamb |
#31
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 27/06/2017 08:29, alan_m wrote:
On 24/06/2017 05:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote: I am also reminded of as society I once joined years ago, all were despondent about the falling membership and wanted 'new blood'.. I wonder if its the same one as I once belonged to which resisted the use of email and electronic documentation for many years after it was common place? It really was a mind set from the top of the organisation of 'We've always used quill pens so why the need to change'? so I proposed going online and appealing to a much broader marklet. They accused me of trying to take it over and destroy the 'matey' nature of it all. One of the proposals for this group is a web based solution but if you want new participation you really need an interface to "social media" Apps which the younger generation have grown up with. Hmmm uk.d-i-y faceache account... spose it has possibilities. -- Cheers, John. /================================================== ===============\ | Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk | |-----------------------------------------------------------------| | John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk | \================================================= ================/ |
#32
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message news so I proposed going online and appealing to a much broader marklet. They accused me of trying to take it over and destroy the 'matey' nature of it all. As if. michael adams .... |
#33
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 18:56:25 +0100, Tim Watts
wrote: Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please I ran a major news server about 25 years ago, using INN on Solaris, when a lot of people were getting their newsfeeds over UUCP. Usenet has been dying for years, but it's proved remarkably resilient. Although I recently had to switch to eternal-september because my ISP's news server stopped handling some UK moderated groups correctly. One of the advantages of usenet is the distributed nature, which allows it to continue when individual servers die. If we set up a central server, how long will that last? |
#34
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 21/06/17 20:57, Caecilius wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 18:56:25 +0100, Tim Watts wrote: Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please I ran a major news server about 25 years ago, using INN on Solaris, when a lot of people were getting their newsfeeds over UUCP. Usenet has been dying for years, but it's proved remarkably resilient. Although I recently had to switch to eternal-september because my ISP's news server stopped handling some UK moderated groups correctly. One of the advantages of usenet is the distributed nature, which allows it to continue when individual servers die. If we set up a central server, how long will that last? As long as the uk-d-i-y wiki server I expect... |
#35
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 21/06/2017 18:56, Tim Watts wrote:
Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Getting group stats is not as easy as it once was. But I am guessing we could be running 10K+ posts a month again. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; or have our own leaching web portal ;-) Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please I seem to recall discussing something similar a decade ago probably - maybe not a full on moderated version of the group, but just a sanitised version that drops the obvious crap. Those who want the full unfiltered feed can can still access it from their existing usenet server, and will see posts the the new server back propagated. The nice thing about usenet is the speed of access - moving from post to post and thread to thread is near enough instant. The threading model is vastly better than most web portals. The downside obviously is the obscurity and the lack of capacity to post images etc. If we are going to add a web "something" to it, then it needs to bring something new to the party - not sure what though. -- Cheers, John. /================================================== ===============\ | Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk | |-----------------------------------------------------------------| | John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk | \================================================= ================/ |
#36
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 21:52:02 +0100, John Rumm
wrote: On 21/06/2017 18:56, Tim Watts wrote: Someone mentioned this the other day... I've run nntp servers before, admittedly 15 years ago - but a simple single server "islanded" setup is not hard in itself. I am not proposing adding to the USENET hierarchy - I'm proposing a single server. The traffic and number of users is low enough for that to work. Getting group stats is not as easy as it once was. But I am guessing we could be running 10K+ posts a month again. Pros: We could moderate and kill OT stuff and obnoxiousness whist whitelisting anyone who posts reasonable stuff; Could keep all the leeching web portals off, by force if necessary; or have our own leaching web portal ;-) Cons: I/we have to run a server; Some people have to be willing to moderate; Would we need our own properly done web portal to make it popular and capture new blood? Opinions please I seem to recall discussing something similar a decade ago probably - maybe not a full on moderated version of the group, but just a sanitised version that drops the obvious crap. Those who want the full unfiltered feed can can still access it from their existing usenet server, and will see posts the the new server back propagated. The nice thing about usenet is the speed of access - moving from post to post and thread to thread is near enough instant. The threading model is vastly better than most web portals. The downside obviously is the obscurity and the lack of capacity to post images etc. If we are going to add a web "something" to it, then it needs to bring something new to the party - not sure what though. You are being far too diplomatic John, things would have to be far worse (deliberate sabotage like u.r.a) for this to be a good idea. Also Google indexes and makes searchable the text of our posts almost instantly, I remember when it took weeks, and even gives the uninitiated users a means to contribute without knowing what Usenet is, and without seeing any adverts. (I never thought I would be singing the praises of GG). -- Graham. %Profound_observation% |
#37
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 21/06/2017 21:52, John Rumm wrote:
The nice thing about usenet is the speed of access - moving from post to post and thread to thread is near enough instant. The threading model is vastly better than most web portals. The downside obviously is the obscurity and the lack of capacity to post images etc. If we were running a server it could allow images to be posted. Most modern news readers can cope with images. If we are going to add a web "something" to it, then it needs to bring something new to the party - not sure what though. |
#38
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
dennis@home wrote:
If we were running a server it could allow images to be posted. Most modern news readers can cope with images. I suppose it could force font color=#0f0 for weatherlawyer's rumblings |
#39
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
On 23/06/2017 07:53, Andy Burns wrote:
dennis@home wrote: If we were running a server it could allow images to be posted. Most modern news readers can cope with images. I suppose it could force font color=#0f0 for weatherlawyer's rumblings Wouldn't 0xfff for foreground and 0xfff for background be better? |
#40
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
uk-d-i-y.moderated? Views...
En el artículo , Andy Burns
escribió: I suppose it could force font color=#0f0 for weatherlawyer's rumblings Subtle -- (\_/) (='.'=) "Between two evils, I always pick (")_(") the one I never tried before." - Mae West |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
3rd RFD: rec.woodworking.all-ages (was: rec.woodworking.moderated) | Woodturning | |||
RFD: rec.woodworking.moderated moderated | Woodworking | |||
Moderated DIY group | UK diy | |||
A moderated group! | UK diy | |||
is there some other moderated.. quality.. ww forum (Taunton's?) | Woodworking |