On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 00:37:38 +0000, "Vito Kuhn"
wrote:

REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
moderated group rec.woodworking.moderated

Zzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Moderator: Susan Welchel
Moderator: Vito Kuhn

Did I miss a memo?


- -
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net

LRod wrote:
Did I miss a memo?

Same one everybody did, seems like Vito got a wild hair. Strikes
me like a lousey idea.
Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 18:06:50 GMT, dave in Fairfax
wrote:

Strikes me like a lousey idea.

If you're going to comment on this thread, please check that your
follow-ups are at least x-posted to news.groups, which is the correct
place to discuss RFDs. If they're not, then they can tend to get lost
from sight of the official process.

But yes, it's a lousy idea. I also _really_ don't like the idea of two
self-appointed moderators who don't even have real email address. One
is a lurker who has barely posted and the other is completely unknown.
Why not just call it rec.woodworking.me.me.me ?

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:23:26 +0100, Andy Dingley
wrote:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 18:06:50 GMT, dave in Fairfax
wrote:

Strikes me like a lousey idea.

If you're going to comment on this thread, please check that your
follow-ups are at least x-posted to news.groups, which is the correct
place to discuss RFDs. If they're not, then they can tend to get lost
from sight of the official process.

But yes, it's a lousy idea. I also _really_ don't like the idea of two
self-appointed moderators who don't even have real email address. One
is a lurker who has barely posted and the other is completely unknown.
Why not just call it rec.woodworking.me.me.me ?

I think we may just get an answer to the burning question "what if
they made a whiney net-nanny's group and nobody came?"


Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.
"I always wanted to be somebody...I should have been more specific..." - Lily Tomlin

Andy Dingley wrote:
If you're going to comment on this thread, please check that your
follow-ups are at least x-posted to news.groups, which is the correct
place to discuss RFDs. If they're not, then they can tend to get lost
from sight of the official process.

But yes, it's a lousy idea. I also _really_ don't like the idea of two
self-appointed moderators who don't even have real email address. One
is a lurker who has barely posted and the other is completely unknown.
Why not just call it rec.woodworking.me.me.me ?

I make it a point, with this exception and occas stupidity, to not
x-post. I doubt that this group that Vito is longing for will
ever get off the ground, even ssuming it gets a "yes" vote. He
has managed to miss the point and the ethos of this NG, which
along with RCW is one of the few left that has common decency as a
core value and pleasant give and take as a manner. Take a look at
the wRECk and you see the remnants of the the older porch and
pond. why would we want to give that up for a sterile serving of
pablum. Thanks for catching the extra e BTW. %-)

Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:23:26 +0100, Andy Dingley
wrote:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 18:06:50 GMT, dave in Fairfax
wrote:

Strikes me like a lousey idea.

snip

But yes, it's a lousy idea. I also _really_ don't like the idea of two
self-appointed moderators who don't even have real email address. One
is a lurker who has barely posted and the other is completely unknown.
Why not just call it rec.woodworking.me.me.me ?

Barely posted is right. DAGS of Groups and Web shows nothing except
the current proposal.

I too think the idea is a non-starter.
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/wgoffe...oodworking.htm

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:23:26 +0100, Andy Dingley
vaguely proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

If you're going to comment on this thread, please check that your
follow-ups are at least x-posted to news.groups, which is the correct
place to discuss RFDs. If they're not, then they can tend to get lost
from sight of the official process.

I'm not commenting on the thread, so I only post here. How does Don
Vito manage to send a message to thge wreck, but make it that my reply
_only_ goes to news.groups?
************************************************** ***
I know I am wrong about just about everything. So I
am not going to listen when I am told I am wrong about
the things I know I am right about.

In article ,
Old Nick wrote:
On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:23:26 +0100, Andy Dingley
vaguely proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

If you're going to comment on this thread, please check that your
follow-ups are at least x-posted to news.groups, which is the correct
place to discuss RFDs. If they're not, then they can tend to get lost
from sight of the official process.

I'm not commenting on the thread, so I only post here. How does Don
Vito manage to send a message to thge wreck, but make it that my reply
_only_ goes to news.groups?

There is a 'magic incantation' to do that automatically.

Look at the 'full headers' of the original posting.

See the header named "Followup-To:"?

Care to guess what it's purpose is? grin

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:23:26 +0100, Andy Dingley
vaguely proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

I agree.

But yes, it's a lousy idea. I also _really_ don't like the idea of two
self-appointed moderators who don't even have real email address. One
is a lurker who has barely posted and the other is completely unknown.
Why not just call it rec.woodworking.me.me.me ?

************************************************** ***
I know I am wrong about just about everything. So I
am not going to listen when I am told I am wrong about
the things I know I am right about.

http://www.pacificnet.net/~johnr/cgi...DogintheManger

"Old Nick" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:23:26 +0100, Andy Dingley
vaguely proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

I agree.

But yes, it's a lousy idea. I also _really_ don't like the idea of two
self-appointed moderators who don't even have real email address. One
is a lurker who has barely posted and the other is completely unknown.
Why not just call it rec.woodworking.me.me.me ?

************************************************** ***
I know I am wrong about just about everything. So I
am not going to listen when I am told I am wrong about
the things I know I am right about.

http://www.pacificnet.net/~johnr/cgi...DogintheManger

"Old Nick" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:23:26 +0100, Andy Dingley
vaguely proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

I agree.

But yes, it's a lousy idea. I also _really_ don't like the idea of two
self-appointed moderators who don't even have real email address. One
is a lurker who has barely posted and the other is completely unknown.
Why not just call it rec.woodworking.me.me.me ?

************************************************** ***
I know I am wrong about just about everything. So I
am not going to listen when I am told I am wrong about
the things I know I am right about.

dave in Fairfax wrote in
:

LRod wrote:
Did I miss a memo?

Same one everybody did, seems like Vito got a wild hair. Strikes
me like a lousey idea.
Dave in Fairfax

Amen to what Dave & LRod said. Completely civilized is usually boring.

I filter out all kinds of crap in analog life. My own filters. Why should
digital life be any different?

Patriarch

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:01:41 +0100, LRod
wrote:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 00:37:38 +0000, "Vito Kuhn"
wrote:

REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
moderated group rec.woodworking.moderated

Zzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Ditto.

Every moderated NG I've seen either stunk or died when the moderator
lost interest. They were all slow to post, reminding me of the old
Fidonet groups.

Has this "Vito" ever posted here about woodworking?

I also don't see how eBay and For Sale posts for tools or equipment
are hurting this group. Maybe Vito can be the king of his own Yahoo
group.

I prefer self-moderation. Filters and proxies are available for free
if someone wants them. Heck, Robert B. even graciously writes proxy
rules for those who can't or don't want to! G

Barry

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 20:13:53 +0000, B a r r y wrote:

Has this "Vito" ever posted here about woodworking?

According to Google Groups, our pal Vito posted fairly regularly
throughout the first half of '02, then disappeared. Mysteriously on Sept 4
a handful of utterly contentless posts (much like this one) appeared with
his name.

As far as I can tell, Susan Welchel has never posted here.

Good luck, Vito, old boy. I'll be staying right here if you don't mind.

--
Joe Wells

Tue, Sep 7, 2004, 12:37am (EDT+4) (Vito=A0Kuhn)
skipped his meds:
SNIP

I bet you'd try to suck the fun out of a rock.



JOAT
A clear case of sub-optimization with respect to the ratio of effort to
enhanced effects.
- Myki

Attaboy: http://www.dailywav.com/0702/attaboy5.wav

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 16:33:52 -0400, (J T) wrote:

Tue, Sep 7, 2004, 12:37am (EDT+4) (Vito*Kuhn)
skipped his meds:
SNIP

I bet you'd try to suck the fun out of a rock.


Simple, succinct, eloquent -- I love it! :-)

Much better than the wordy response I came up with.



JOAT
A clear case of sub-optimization with respect to the ratio of effort to
enhanced effects.
- Myki

Attaboy: http://www.dailywav.com/0702/attaboy5.wav

There are numerous ways to filter out the junk. Many applications
are very effective. Personally, I dislike moderated groups although
they might be of value to some people. A moderator may omit posts
which are actually related to woodworking, and I tend to read
"slightly off" topic posts (remember the shop dog that passed away?)
Plus, moderated groups delay posts and I occasionally I appreciate
quick responses.

I too dislike moderated newsgroups. Even normally fair moderators can
occasionally act against the best interest of the group (everyone has
his/her own agenda now and then). I can filter out people I don't want to
hear from pretty effectively even with OE. I prefer I have that control
rather than some moderator I don't know and have no way to judge.

Do you really want someone else deciding what you can read? That's what a
moderated Ng is.

If you want that, there are thousands of email lists and forums that are
moderated and the owner/moderator can decide for you what you are allowed to
read, and you will never even know what you might have missed.

"Phisherman" wrote in message
news
There are numerous ways to filter out the junk. Many applications
are very effective. Personally, I dislike moderated groups although
they might be of value to some people. A moderator may omit posts
which are actually related to woodworking, and I tend to read
"slightly off" topic posts (remember the shop dog that passed away?)
Plus, moderated groups delay posts and I occasionally I appreciate
quick responses.

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:01:41 +0100, LRod
wrote:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 00:37:38 +0000, "Vito Kuhn"
wrote:

REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
moderated group rec.woodworking.moderated

Zzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Moderator: Susan Welchel
Moderator: Vito Kuhn

Did I miss a memo?



Seems like we have an answer to the question, "Who died and made you
newsgroup monitor?" ;-)

More seriously, it will be interesting to see if very many respond to
this request positively. rec.ww has its own unique flavor, but it is akin
to a real-world shop, where people talk about all sorts of things in
addition to the wood project de' jour.

To summarize: I don't think a new group such as this would be very
interesting, nor a very good idea.


- -
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net

Mark & Juanita wrote:
To summarize: I don't think a new group such as this would be very
interesting, nor a very good idea.



I don't see any need for it either. My filters seem to keep the crap down to a
dull roar.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN


http://www.mortimerschnerd.com

In article , Mortimer
Schnerd, RN wrote:

I don't see any need for it either. My filters seem to keep the crap down to
a
dull roar.

Most of my filters for rec.woodworking haven't been used for 60 - 90
days. The OT threads are usually clearly labelled as such if I wanted
to filter them out.

So we have a proposal that no one has spoken in favor of, proposed by
two people who have little record on usenet (one who hasn't posted on
rec.woodworking since mid-2002 and one who according to Google has
*never* posted on usenet) and no experience moderating a newsgroup.

I doubt it will even get to a 2nd RFD.

Mark & Juanita wrote:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:01:41 +0100, LRod
wrote:


On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 00:37:38 +0000, "Vito Kuhn"
wrote:


REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
moderated group rec.woodworking.moderated

Zzzzzzzzzzzzz.


Moderator: Susan Welchel
Moderator: Vito Kuhn

Did I miss a memo?




Seems like we have an answer to the question, "Who died and made you
newsgroup monitor?" ;-)

More seriously, it will be interesting to see if very many respond to
this request positively. rec.ww has its own unique flavor, but it is akin
to a real-world shop, where people talk about all sorts of things in
addition to the wood project de' jour.

To summarize: I don't think a new group such as this would be very
interesting, nor a very good idea.



- -
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net



This is right up there with the censorship pushed through by a bunch of
idiots that controls political ads by citizens within 30-60 days of anelection.

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 20:26:55 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

More seriously, it will be interesting to see if very many respond to
this request positively. rec.ww has its own unique flavor, but it is akin
to a real-world shop, where people talk about all sorts of things in
addition to the wood project de' jour.

I subscribed to rec.woodworking briefly before I retired, looking for
a post-retirement hobby, and I found the group to be an extremely
pleasant place, with a charming personality. Very little acrimony,
too. And helpful to the ignorant (moi). Unless it has changed
dramatically, I'd think that this request is doomed to failure.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

Greetings and Salutations....

On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 13:34:52 -0700, Mary Shafer
wrote:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 20:26:55 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

More seriously, it will be interesting to see if very many respond to
this request positively. rec.ww has its own unique flavor, but it is akin
to a real-world shop, where people talk about all sorts of things in
addition to the wood project de' jour.

I subscribed to rec.woodworking briefly before I retired, looking for
a post-retirement hobby, and I found the group to be an extremely
pleasant place, with a charming personality. Very little acrimony,
too. And helpful to the ignorant (moi). Unless it has changed
dramatically, I'd think that this request is doomed to failure.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

I have to agree here. Not only is there a fairly
good history of "on topic" postings, but, very few flame
wars (and I have been a part of BOTH). It is generally a
good resource for WW discussion and information.
As for moderation...I think the REAL problem is that
moderating a news group is a big job under the best circumstances
and, for a high volume group such as this could well be a
FULL TIME job. Anybody want to take that on?
Regards
Dave Mundt

In article , Dave Mundt
wrote:

As for moderation...I think the REAL problem is that
moderating a news group is a big job under the best circumstances
and, for a high volume group such as this could well be a
FULL TIME job. Anybody want to take that on?

That remains the problem with this proposal.We have little or no
information regarding the experience of the proposed moderators, and no
information about the procedures and tools they propose to use in that
moderation.

Until that information is forthcoming, the proposal is worthless, IMO.

And if the information isn't forthcoming reasonably soon, I will
conclude that this proposal's goal was simply to waste people's tiime
and voice a gripe on the part of the proponent rather than a serious
attempt to form a new group.

djb

Dave Balderstone wrote:
And if the information isn't forthcoming reasonably soon, I will
conclude that this proposal's goal was simply to waste people's tiime
and voice a gripe on the part of the proponent rather than a serious
attempt to form a new group.

I'm thinking that this "may" have been one of the best trolls
yet. Put it together, an unknown drops in, incites a riot and
disappears. Excellent job, I'd say. Took us all in
Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 00:37:38 +0000, "Vito Kuhn"
wrote:

I've given this a little more thought and have the following
observations and opinions:

RATIONALE: rec.woodworking.moderated

This group is proposed as a moderated global forum for the discussion
of woodworking topics. The group is a moderated subgroup of
rec.woodworking (The Wreck, as it is commonly referred to by
subscribers), which is averaging more than 10,000 posts per month
in 2004.

Reasons for creating a moderated version of rec.woodworking:

1-To ensure that woodworking remains the only topic of discussion

*****************************
/begin hidden agenda

2-To help divide the traffic of busy newsgroup that is very difficult to keep up with

/end hidden agenda
*****************************

3-To provide a family-safe environment to discuss woodworking topics,
free of foul language and pornography links

4-To offer woodworkers a higher signal to noise ratio than
rec.woodworking provides

Basically this is just another way of suggesting "split the wreck," a
proposal that has been suggested many times before and roundly
excoriated each time some self important, know-it-most newbie proposes
it by the regular users of the Wreck. I have no expectations but that
it will be scuttled yet again.

MODERATOR INFO: rec.woodworking.moderated

Moderator: Susan Welchel
Moderator: Vito Kuhn

Frankly, other than the fact that the proposed moderator(s) apparently
can't keep up with the Wreck traffic (see highlighted area above), I
couldn't care less if they want to take their dolls and...er, start a
new newsgroup. I do think they need to delete all (TM)'ed references,
such as "the Wreck," "jummy wood," and "klown hammer" or any
derivatives or diminuitives in their activities. Most real Wreckers
won't want to have any association with "wreck liters" (TM, here and
now).

Administrative contact address:

Article submission address:

Proponent: Vito Kuhn

I suggest an email alias of in order to conform
with the "truth in advertising" concept.

- -
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 00:37:38 +0000, "Vito Kuhn"
wrote:

REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
moderated group rec.woodworking.moderated


The great beauty of the Wreck is its lack of moderation.

It is an immoderate society of equals without equal.

Your request for discussion will suffer concussion, percussion,
repercussion - and plain old cussin'.

NetNazis need not apply to the Wreck - The Wreck needs no guidance.

It is as it ever was, a beacon in the darkened sea of UseLessNet,
shining its weird light on fools and philosophers alike, with no more
respect for one than the other.

As Wreckers, we will beat on each other but those who are not Wreck
shall only beat on their empty drums.

Get you along Fisherman, your lures are without attraction and your
hooks are dull.

You are as a fart in a windstorm, a pimple on the ass of time, a
baitless barb in a sea of well-fed fishes.

I wish you well

Whatever your agenda

Keep hold of your pudenda

It is your only friend.



(burma shave)


Regards,
Tom.

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

Well Said Tom

Tom Watson wrote:
On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 00:37:38 +0000, "Vito Kuhn"
wrote:


REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
moderated group rec.woodworking.moderated



The great beauty of the Wreck is its lack of moderation.

It is an immoderate society of equals without equal.

Your request for discussion will suffer concussion, percussion,
repercussion - and plain old cussin'.

NetNazis need not apply to the Wreck - The Wreck needs no guidance.

It is as it ever was, a beacon in the darkened sea of UseLessNet,
shining its weird light on fools and philosophers alike, with no more
respect for one than the other.

As Wreckers, we will beat on each other but those who are not Wreck
shall only beat on their empty drums.

Get you along Fisherman, your lures are without attraction and your
hooks are dull.

You are as a fart in a windstorm, a pimple on the ass of time, a
baitless barb in a sea of well-fed fishes.

I wish you well

Whatever your agenda

Keep hold of your pudenda

It is your only friend.



(burma shave)


Regards,
Tom.

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

On 11 Sep 2004 01:02:30 -0700, (VK) wrote:

There is nothing wrong with the existing group

Exactly.


Some specific questions:

- Who are you ? You're near invisible from previous postings. Why
should we give moderator status to you of all people, let alone
someone else who we have never heard of at all ? Why has there been
no attempt made to even talk to some of the high volume posters and
see if they would be interested in sharing the moderation task ?

- A hotmail address isn't a convincing technical argument for being
capable of moderating this high volume ng single-handed.

- How _are_ you going to deal with single-handed moderation of a very
large group ?

- How do postings arrive in rec.woodworking.moderated ? Will they
be posted to it, or are you planning to make it a digest of the
existing rec.woodworking traffic ? I can tell you know that you do
_not_ have my agreement to repost any of my postings into this new ng.

- How are you going to exclude the puppy whizzer etc. from a
moderated group ? There is a problem with these fools (best dealt
with by killfiling), but do you think forged moderation is really
beyond the wit of trolls ?


I accept that it's your right as a usenet user to post any deluded RFD
you might wish to. However there seems to be a total absence of any
support for it, and I look forward to the CFV (if any) being
thoroughly defeated.

(VK) wrote in message . com...
wrote in message . ..

Trying to decide at this point which proposal is worst, this one or te
satanism one.

If you are comparing me to a satanist, then you have got a real
problem. I am a God-fearing Christian. I will not longer reply to
anyone with such a disrespectful tone.

So, before the new group has even been put to a vote, the proposed
moderator has

(a) demonstrated an inability to understand the content of a
message in plain english--whereas the original poster was merely
comparing two RFDs, the proposed moderator immediately takes personal
offense.

(b) demonstrated an inability to respond impartially--rather than
addressing the comment, he insults the original poster and resolves to
ignore him.

(c) brought off-topic, irrelevant personal details into the
discussion--the fact that he is a "God-fearing Christian" is of no
interest, except to demonstrate potential biases the proposed
moderator will bring with him. Tell me, will posts from Jewish
woodworkers be permitted? What if a black muslim wishes to
participate? Or a (gasp) ATHEIST?

Normally, none of those questions would cross my mind, but from
personal experience, someone who responds to trivial matters by
trumpeting their status as a God-Fearing Christian, what I hear quite
often is someone trumpeting narrow-minded, intolerant bigotry and
hypocrisy.

google-user responds:

Normally, none of those questions would cross my mind, but from
personal experience, someone who responds to trivial matters by
trumpeting their status as a God-Fearing Christian, what I hear quite
often is someone trumpeting narrow-minded, intolerant bigotry and
hypocrisy.


And, gasp, you've just slipped into politics, describing our current Prez. Or,
rather, quoting his description of himself.

Charlie Self
"Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and
hurry off as if nothing happened." Sir Winston Churchill

Well, from my standpoint, I think he (Vito)is a CONTROL FREAK! I think
he wants to exert absolute control over those that don't share his
point-of-view. I will stick with the regular Wreck - I have been on (and
off) it for years. I have made some good online wrecker acquaintances
that I wouldn't change for anything - even though we very often disagree
with each other's position. At least on the Old Wreck, one can express
his opinion - a lot like visiting each other's woodshop. While
woodworking is sure the topic of choice, having a Net Nanny that would
kick one of us out for using an F-word, S-word or other innocuous
explanation is an unacceptable choice.

He can go off and form his own group. And then...uh....stay there. And
leave the unadulterated Wreck for men and women with stronger
constitutions...

my .02 worth

Philski

On 12 Sep 2004 01:52:40 -0700, (VK) wrote:

I expect to have a nice
subscriber base, judging from the e-mail support I have been getting
from likeminded folk.

I don't believe you.

Now you've already admitted to having a secret and undisclosed plot
for at least one extra moderator, selected solely by you and
undisclosed in the RFD, so already I don't regard you as a
particularly open or trustworthy person.

If anyone really _is_ in favour of this proposal, would they please
care to speak up openly ?

On 12 Sep 2004 02:07:06 -0700, (VK) wrote:

We have a total of seven connections.

Unless you live in a real server bunker, I don't see your "seven
connections" as especially reliable. Where do they run? To the same
telegraph pole ? Down the same garden path? It's still exposed to
these same single point failures.


There are 4 computers and a WebTV on the property.

Not to mention that confidence-inspiring hotmail address.


What sort of UPS capacity do you have on the house ? And if you did
lose power / gain a plumbing flood, would you still be interested in
mod duties ?

Co-resident moderators just aren't distinguishable moderators from a
reliability viewpoint, even if they are from the volume aspect.

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 02:01:03 +0100, Andy Dingley wrote:
On 12 Sep 2004 02:07:06 -0700, (VK) wrote:

We have a total of seven connections.

Unless you live in a real server bunker, I don't see your "seven
connections" as especially reliable. Where do they run? To the same
telegraph pole ? Down the same garden path? It's still exposed to
these same single point failures.

Well, he's got hotmail, and 6 "AOL Free 1000 Hours" CDs, so he's set.
Cut the guy some slack, he's clearly thought this through.

There are 4 computers and a WebTV on the property.
Not to mention that confidence-inspiring hotmail address.

Yup. Hell, I've got more computers than that in my workshop.

What sort of UPS capacity do you have on the house ? And if you did
lose power / gain a plumbing flood, would you still be interested in
mod duties ?

Prediction: If by some random chance this actually passes, it'll wither
and die just like every other "I want a moderated group because I can"
group.

Co-resident moderators just aren't distinguishable moderators from a
reliability viewpoint, even if they are from the volume aspect.

....and when he gets bored with it, it'll just die, taking up namespace.
Seen it happen for more than a dozen years, over and over and over.

Dave Hinz writes:
There are 4 computers and a WebTV on the property.
Not to mention that confidence-inspiring hotmail address.
Yup. Hell, I've got more computers than that in my workshop.

Heck, I have more computers than that on my DESK.

On 16 Sep 2004 12:33:29 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:

Dave Hinz writes:
There are 4 computers and a WebTV on the property.
Not to mention that confidence-inspiring hotmail address.
Yup. Hell, I've got more computers than that in my workshop.

Heck, I have more computers than that on my DESK.

Hm, let's see. Depending on if you count the VMWare instance of
Windows that I have running on the Linux box, then yes or no.

On 16 Sep 2004 12:33:29 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:

Dave Hinz writes:
There are 4 computers and a WebTV on the property.
Not to mention that confidence-inspiring hotmail address.
Yup. Hell, I've got more computers than that in my workshop.

Heck, I have more computers than that on my DESK.

Hm, let's see. Depending on if you count the VMWare instance of
Windows that I have running on the Linux box, then yes or no.

DJ Delorie wrote in :

There are 4 computers and a WebTV on the property.
Not to mention that confidence-inspiring hotmail address.
Yup. Hell, I've got more computers than that in my workshop.

Heck, I have more computers than that on my DESK.

I don't see why they would need more than two computers (one primary, and
one for backup) to perform moderation duties, given that their software
runs in an IE window. Technically, one computer and the WebTV would
probably be enough.

--
Bill