poor usenet

[pixieblogger]

dead,
dies,
dead,
usenotted.
died,
dead

Or is is .... Googles Fault!

[Stokrotka]

Post by pixieblogger
dead,
dies,
dead,
usenotted.
died,
dead
Or is is .... Googles Fault!

Noooooooo.
Usner is better then www,
is safe.

[Scott Bryce]

dead, dies, dead, usenotted. died, dead

And the biggest problem is that I don't know where else to go to find
the kind of knowledgeable people who used to hang out here.

[Jerry Stuckle]

Post by Scott Bryce

dead, dies, dead, usenotted. died, dead

And the biggest problem is that I don't know where else to go to find
the kind of knowledgeable people who used to hang out here.

Scott, there are still a few around. Just because people don't post
doesn't necessarily mean they aren't here.

The biggest problem with usenet is trolls - and you can't do anything
about them unless you moderate every post to a newsgroup. In a busy
newsgroup, that can take a lot of time.

[Stokrotka]

....unless you moderate every post to a newsgroup.

Moderate is bad.

[Jerry Stuckle]

Post by Stokrotka

....unless you moderate every post to a newsgroup.

Moderate is bad.

Not always. Sometimes it's the only way to keep the trolls out.

[Stokrotka]

Post by Jerry Stuckle

Post by Stokrotka
Moderate is bad.

Not always. Sometimes it's the only way to keep the trolls out.

Have you got any prcision algoritm to separate trolls and not trolls,
with out personality facts?

[Jerry Stuckle]

Post by Stokrotka

Post by Jerry Stuckle

Post by Stokrotka
Moderate is bad.

Not always. Sometimes it's the only way to keep the trolls out.

Have you got any prcision algoritm to separate trolls and not trolls,
with out personality facts?

You don't use algorithms to separate trolls and non-trolls. You
moderate the posts themselves.

Learn how moderation works.

[Stokrotka]

Post by Jerry Stuckle

Post by Stokrotka
Have you got any prcision algoritm to separate trolls and not trolls,
with out personality facts?

You don't use algorithms to separate trolls and non-trolls. You
moderate the posts themselves.
Learn how moderation works.

I mean you have not any obiectivism.
You have not any clear principles.

[Jerry Stuckle]

Post by Stokrotka

Post by Jerry Stuckle

Post by Stokrotka
Have you got any prcision algoritm to separate trolls and not trolls,
with out personality facts?

You don't use algorithms to separate trolls and non-trolls. You
moderate the posts themselves.
Learn how moderation works.

I mean you have not any obiectivism.
You have not any clear principles.

Sure you can. Rules for posting are publicized and moderators accept
anything which follows the rules. Anything which violates the rules is
rejected.

It happens all the time. And the only ones who complain are those who
don't follow the rules. They don't believe the rules apply to them.

[Stokrotka]

Post by Jerry Stuckle

Post by Stokrotka

Post by Jerry Stuckle

Post by Stokrotka
Have you got any prcision algoritm to separate trolls and not trolls,
with out personality facts?

You don't use algorithms to separate trolls and non-trolls. You
moderate the posts themselves.
Learn how moderation works.

I mean you have not any obiectivism.
You have not any clear principles.

Sure you can. Rules for posting are publicized and moderators accept
anything which follows the rules.

So : Write program which will moderate. Then moderator isn't nessesary.
If this work isn't done by machine , and source of program isn't published,
the process of moderate isn't right.

[Jerry Stuckle]

Post by Stokrotka

Post by Jerry Stuckle

Post by Stokrotka

Post by Jerry Stuckle

Post by Stokrotka
Have you got any prcision algoritm to separate trolls and not trolls,
with out personality facts?

You don't use algorithms to separate trolls and non-trolls. You
moderate the posts themselves.
Learn how moderation works.

I mean you have not any obiectivism.
You have not any clear principles.

Sure you can. Rules for posting are publicized and moderators accept
anything which follows the rules.

So : Write program which will moderate. Then moderator isn't nessesary.
If this work isn't done by machine , and source of program isn't published,
the process of moderate isn't right.

That would require artificial intelligence beyond what is available
today. It's more than just looking for words - it's understanding the
message being passed.

The current system works quite well in most groups. The only ones who
complain about moderation are the ones whose posts are rejected. But
they are also the ones who created the need for moderation in the first
place.

[Stokrotka]

Post by Jerry Stuckle

Post by Stokrotka
So : Write program which will moderate. Then moderator isn't nessesary.
If this work isn't done by machine , and source of program isn't published,
the process of moderate isn't right.

That would require artificial intelligence beyond what is available
today. It's more than just looking for words - it's understanding the
message being passed.

Now you understand why moderated group are bad:
1. the author of post can be more itelligent then moderator.
2. there isn't any people which is in 100% right,
so nobody can do this enaught good.

Post by Jerry Stuckle
The current system works quite well in most groups.

O, yes: because there is no any moderator in most groups
- this is reason why is well.

Post by Jerry Stuckle
The only ones who
complain about moderation are the ones whose posts are rejected. But
they are also the ones who created the need for moderation in the first
place.

I don't understand.

[Jerry Stuckle]

Post by Stokrotka

Post by Jerry Stuckle

Post by Stokrotka
So : Write program which will moderate. Then moderator isn't nessesary.
If this work isn't done by machine , and source of program isn't published,
the process of moderate isn't right.

That would require artificial intelligence beyond what is available
today. It's more than just looking for words - it's understanding the
message being passed.

1. the author of post can be more itelligent then moderator.
2. there isn't any people which is in 100% right,
so nobody can do this enaught good.

Nope. Whether the author is more intelligent than the moderator is
immaterial. Any moderator with any sense can tell when rules such as
"no personal attacks" are broken. It doesn't take an Einstein - but you
can't do it with programs.

And no, no one is 100% right. That's why there is an appeal process -
and generally more than one moderator. I the latter case, questionable
posts are discussed amongst the moderators.

Post by Stokrotka

Post by Jerry Stuckle
The current system works quite well in most groups.

O, yes: because there is no any moderator in most groups
- this is reason why is well.

That's right. We are talking about moderated groups here, and it works
quite well in most of those groups.

Post by Stokrotka

Post by Jerry Stuckle
The only ones who
complain about moderation are the ones whose posts are rejected. But
they are also the ones who created the need for moderation in the first
place.

I don't understand.

I can understand why.

[Stokrotka]

Post by Jerry Stuckle

Post by Stokrotka
I don't understand.

I can understand why.

English language isn't my national language.
This discussion is too difficult for me.
I haven't enought time to learn english now.