I want to expand a bit on what Stu wrote to make sure it is
clear what the group's current needs are.
Right now the software used to manage the moderation of the
newsgroup is hosted on a server I own. I find it necessary due
to life circumstances to divest myself of various external
commitments and obligations, including hosting this software.
Therefore, to keep the group going we need a volunteer who is
willing and able to both set up moderation infrastructure
somewhere else and maintain it once it is set up.
Stu may also be looking for a new generation of moderators to
help with the group (I think that would be a great idea!), but
if the only new volunteers we get are moderators, that will
not be sufficient; we also need someone equipped to do the
technical setup and maintenance.
Thanks.
On 01/04/2025 20:51, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
I want to expand a bit on what Stu wrote to make sure it is
clear what the group's current needs are.
Right now the software used to manage the moderation of the
newsgroup is hosted on a server I own. I find it necessary due
to life circumstances to divest myself of various external
commitments and obligations, including hosting this software.
Therefore, to keep the group going we need a volunteer who is
willing and able to both set up moderation infrastructure
somewhere else and maintain it once it is set up.
Stu may also be looking for a new generation of moderators to
help with the group (I think that would be a great idea!), but
if the only new volunteers we get are moderators, that will
not be sufficient; we also need someone equipped to do the
technical setup and maintenance.
Thanks.
Would a Facebook group work?
I want to expand a bit on what Stu wrote to make sure it is
clear what the group's current needs are.
Right now the software used to manage the moderation of the
newsgroup is hosted on a server I own. I find it necessary due
to life circumstances to divest myself of various external
commitments and obligations, including hosting this software.
Therefore, to keep the group going we need a volunteer who is
willing and able to both set up moderation infrastructure
somewhere else and maintain it once it is set up.
Stu may also be looking for a new generation of moderators to
help with the group (I think that would be a great idea!), but
if the only new volunteers we get are moderators, that will
not be sufficient; we also need someone equipped to do the
technical setup and maintenance.
1. It would be extremely helpful to know what is involved in that
technical setup and maintenance. (I did some googling before asking
this, but couldn't find any clear and current answers.)
2. And does the server need to be owned by a moderator, as opposed to
the moderator owning a domain and website hosted at a provider?
3. I can't remember which group, but a few years ago, if memory
serves, I was subscribed to some group where a robot automatically
approved any post from someone who who had already had N number of
posts approved. Is that an option? It wouldn't eliminate the need for >moderators, but it would reduce the workload.
I think the easiest approach would be to simply make the group
unmoderated. I realize there is already an unmoderated taxes group
which receives a lot of spam, but I think if you left the name as
"moderated" the spam posts would be minimal and veteran users would just >ignore them.
On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 21:51:40 EST, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
I want to expand a bit on what Stu wrote to make sure it is
clear what the group's current needs are.
Right now the software used to manage the moderation of the
newsgroup is hosted on a server I own. I find it necessary due
to life circumstances to divest myself of various external
commitments and obligations, including hosting this software.
Therefore, to keep the group going we need a volunteer who is
willing and able to both set up moderation infrastructure
somewhere else and maintain it once it is set up.
Stu may also be looking for a new generation of moderators to
help with the group (I think that would be a great idea!), but
if the only new volunteers we get are moderators, that will
not be sufficient; we also need someone equipped to do the
technical setup and maintenance.
Three questions:
1. It would be extremely helpful to know what is involved in that
technical setup and maintenance. (I did some googling before asking
this, but couldn't find any clear and current answers.)
2. And does the server need to be owned by a moderator, as opposed to
the moderator owning a domain and website hosted at a provider?
3. I can't remember which group, but a few years ago, if memory
serves, I was subscribed to some group where a robot automatically
approved any post from someone who who had already had N number of
posts approved. Is that an option? It wouldn't eliminate the need for >moderators, but it would reduce the workload.
. . .
I don't really think the moderation workload is an issue here; this
group gets very few postings. Having said that, STUMP allows
moderators to add regular posters to a "good guys list" which causes
their submissions to be auto-approved. This relies on them posting >consistently with the same email address in the From line. It doesn't
matter whether it's a real, working address or not, it just has to be
the same every time.
Rick <rick@nospam.com> writes:
I think the easiest approach would be to simply make the group
unmoderated. I realize there is already an unmoderated taxes group
which receives a lot of spam, but I think if you left the name as
"moderated" the spam posts would be minimal and veteran users would just
ignore them.
1) I don't know what reason you could possibly have to believe
that spammers won't post to the group just because it has
"moderated" in the name. They will absolutely post to the
group. There is no point in having an two unmoderated tax
newsgroups; they would be functionally identical.
2) I think I can say with some confidence that there is no way
the Big-8 Management Board, of which I was one of the founding
members, will allow an unmoderated group whose name ends in
".moderated" to exist within the Big-8 hierarchy.
As for the Big-8 Management Board - assuming it still functions - any
actions it might take would likely not be instantaneous.
There would be some period of time where the group would still be
allowed to function, even if technically mis-labeled as "moderated"
when it's not.
The important point is that there is really no harm in letting the
group go un-moderated but keeping the current name for some period of
time. If the choice is disbanding the group - meaning no group at all
- or having a less than perfect group where spammers could start
hitting the group but regular users could also keep posting for some
period of time, I still think having some version of the group is
better than no group at all.
Am Wed, 8 Jan 2025 22:33:28 EST
schrieb Rick <rick@nospam.com>:
As for the Big-8 Management Board - assuming it still functions - any
actions it might take would likely not be instantaneous.
Big-8 still exists - I am a member there.
There would be some period of time where the group would still be
allowed to function, even if technically mis-labeled as "moderated"
when it's not.
The important point is that there is really no harm in letting the
group go un-moderated but keeping the current name for some period of
time. If the choice is disbanding the group - meaning no group at all
- or having a less than perfect group where spammers could start
hitting the group but regular users could also keep posting for some
period of time, I still think having some version of the group is
better than no group at all.
This just creates more confusion.
misc.taxes exists - already unmoderated.
========================================= MODERATOR'S COMMENT:
Thank you for contributing.
I haven't checked in a while, but the last time I went to misc.taxes, it
had gotten overrun with spam and was completely unusable.
It appears that Rick <rick@nospam.com> said:
I haven't checked in a while, but the last time I went to misc.taxes, it >>had gotten overrun with spam and was completely unusable.
I just looked, and it's full of cross-posted political arguments that
have close to nothing to do with taxss. I agree it's unusable.
Hi All -
The newsgroup misc.taxes.moderated has been around for a long time, and has been helpful to many of us. But the time has come that the old timers who have been managing and moderating the group are getting older, and we will need help for it to survive.
If anyone here has technical skill and would like to help maintain MTM for the future, please let me know. Otherwise, in about one month's time, the group will, in effect, go away.
Write to me at stu@lexregia.com
Thanks.
On 1/3/2025 7:38 AM, Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
Hi All -
The newsgroup misc.taxes.moderated has been around for a long time,
and has
been helpful to many of us. But the time has come that the old timers
who
have been managing and moderating the group are getting older, and we
will
need help for it to survive.
If anyone here has technical skill and would like to help maintain MTM
for
the future, please let me know. Otherwise, in about one month's time,
the
group will, in effect, go away.
Write to me at stu@lexregia.com
Thanks.
If MTM goes away (a horrible thought), what are some other tax forums
that might be useful and not overtaken by angry mobs? Not just Usenet forums.
Thanks.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 151:32:11 |
| Calls: | 10,383 |
| Files: | 14,054 |
| Messages: | 6,417,807 |