From: qut@netcom.com (Skip)
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 12:52:02 +0800
To: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Subject: Re: PreRFD: comp.org.cypherpunks
In-Reply-To: <sD41sD3w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: <199608220147.SAA22328@netcom.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


ON
! 
! qut@netcom.com (Skip, OBC) writes:
! 
! > ! Jim McCoy wrote:
! > ! > qut@netcom.com (Skip) writes:
! > ! > > My suggestion number #1:
! > ! > > No moderation.
! > ! > 
! > ! > Suggestion 1 on how to diminish the feeble S/N ratio on cypherpunks:
! > ! > 
! > ! >         make it a newsgroup
! > ! > Suggestion 2:
! > ! >         make it an unmoderated newsgroup
! > ! 
! > ! How about making it a robomoderated newsgroup with only one enforced
! > ! rule, forbidding any crossposting?
! > 
! > If moderation, then why not moderator(s) who simply send out cancel 
! > messages to everthing that is crossposted?  Traditional moderated 
! > newsgroups are technically inferior because all posts go through netnews 
! > chokepoints and then depends on the moderator(s) who's inevitable 
! > position has been the irresponsible one of keeping the position long 
! > after they lose interest with the high volumes.  Even if their was such
! > a person, there is still are chokepoint problem which is stupid to  
! > engage in.
! > 
! > In any case, creation of comp.org.cypherpunks in no way means gatewaying 
! > or shutting down cypherpunks@toad.com .
! 
! How about a NoCeM-moderated newsgroup?
! I.e., several parties can issue 'hide' NoCeM notices for whatever
! material they consider off-topic, including cross-posts. Several
! other parties can issue 'highlight' NoCeM's for articles they
! consider particularly worthy.

With the advent of killfiles and all sorts of filtering capabilities, 
there is no excuse for requiring moderation at all other than for 
purposes of censorship.

! ---
! 
! Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
! Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps
!