"Phyllis and Jim" <jimandphyllisrp@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1194055132.016070.113270@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... >I am posting on behalf to the moderation team for rec.ponds.moderated > to invite all rpm posters to help fund the moderation software for the > group. > > It costs $360 per year to rent the ReadyStump software that is used > to > moderate posts to RPM. The 2007 cost was covered by donations and it > is time to collect money to cover 2008. > > > All RPM posters and visitors are invited to contribute toward the > cost > of moderation. You can make donations in two ways: > > > 1. by PayPal at the following location: > http://rpm.chipin.com/moderation-software-for-recpondsmoderated > This address will also show you the progress. > > 2. by sending a check to Dr. Jim Hurley, 5422 Clinton Blvd, Jackson, > MS 39209. Make a note on the bottom corner that it is for RPM > software. > > > We will keep you posted on progress toward our goal of $360. > > > Thank you. > > > Jim Hurley > for the RPM Moderation Team > why?

"jthread" <jthread@att.net> wrote: > "Phyllis and Jim" <jimandphyllisrp@gmail.com> wrote in message > [ . . . ] > > All RPM posters and visitors are invited to contribute toward the > > cost of moderation. You can make donations in two ways: > > > > 1. by PayPal at the following location: > > http://rpm.chipin.com/moderation-software-for-recpondsmoderated > > This address will also show you the progress. > > > > 2. by sending a check to Dr. Jim Hurley, 5422 Clinton Blvd, Jackson, > > MS 39209. Make a note on the bottom corner that it is for RPM > > software. > > [ . . . ] > why? Who should pay? Those who volunteer to do the moderation or those who benefir from their efforts? Although I've become primarily a lurker, I greatly appreciate the SPAM and flame absence here. I don't follow every thread, but enjoy the ones I do, and when I think I have something of value to add, I do. When I've asked a question, I've gotten worthwhile answers or suggestions. I'm also keenly aware that my encouragement played some small part in getting this group started. It's an INVITATION to contribute! Those who can't, or don't wish to, aren't going to get blackballed. I can't afford to donate much, these days, but I've mailed a nominal check to Jim. I thank the moderators for performing yeoman duty to the betterment of ponding worldwide. The soapbox is now empty. Next! -- Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their families! I've known US vets who served as far back as the Spanish American War. They are all my heroes! Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~

Gill Passman <gillnospamat@gillsfish.co.uk> wrote: > jthread wrote: > > "Phyllis and Jim" <jimandphyllisrp@gmail.com> wrote in message > > [ . . . ] > >>All RPM posters and visitors are invited to contribute toward the > >>cost of moderation. You can make donations in two ways: > >> > >>1. by PayPal at the following location: > >>http://rpm.chipin.com/moderation-software-for-recpondsmoderated > >>This address will also show you the progress. > >> > >>2. by sending a check to Dr. Jim Hurley, 5422 Clinton Blvd, Jackson, > >>MS 39209. Make a note on the bottom corner that it is for RPM > >>software. > >> [ . . . ] And if, on the day of reckoning, we're still short, I'll pony up with a few bucks more, and I'm sure I won't be alone. -- Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their families! I've known US vets who served as far back as the Spanish American War. They are all my heroes! Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~

In article <lahui3hckjjh5ucjfvlbcnqu27ubpsubij@4ax.com> Galen Hekhuis <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> writes: >I realize moderation has been going on for some time, and that the >ideal solution would be to do the whole thing without paying a cent. >There are few programs out there that are suitable for a bunch of >folks moderating a newsgroup. The fact that there are several >moderators precludes using a system set up for only one. ISP >constraints and "lag time," or the time between when a post is made >and when in actually appears after moderation tend to work against any >email type scheme. Um, just so you know, moderated Usenet groups are entirely based on an "email type scheme." New posts are diverted to the standard moderation email address for the group. > These and some other constraints have pretty much >forced us to go with a web-based program for moderation. That >requires a "front end" to the program which can deal with most of the >spam and other stuff that a moderated group is subject to, I will note, since you are on the threshold of paying for this again, that your selected software also has a strong tendency toward false positives with no helpful messages. I have yet to get a post through to the moderation queue. (Unless this one happens to work. I keep trying... Nope. Have to hotwire it yet again.) -- Drew Lawson And I know there's more to the story I know I need to see more drew@furrfu.com I need to see s'more, hear s'more feel s'more. I gotta be s'more

In article <1mt8j3ddqi1g2phkkahmej4n86t3b1cjub@4ax.com> Galen Hekhuis <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> writes: >On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 14:37:18 GMT, drew@furrfu.com (Drew Lawson) wrote: > >>Um, just so you know, moderated Usenet groups are entirely based >>on an "email type scheme." New posts are diverted to the standard >>moderation email address for the group. > >I am aware of that. What I was trying to say (unsuccessfully in this >case) is that there are several email based moderation schemes, as >opposed to web based moderation schemes. It is the moderation, not >the operation of the newsgroup, which makes use of email for >moderation undesirable in this particular application. Gotcha. That got clearer to me in some of the additional posts. >>I will note, since you are on the threshold of paying for this >>again, that your selected software also has a strong tendency toward >>false positives with no helpful messages. I have yet to get a post >>through to the moderation queue. (Unless this one happens to work. >>I keep trying... Nope. Have to hotwire it yet again.) > >This is one of the advantages of having an unmoderated somewhat >"parallel" group (rec.ponds). One can quickly determine if the >problem is with the moderated group by posting identical articles to >both groups (no cross-posting, as that is automatically rejected by >the moderation software). Identical posts made through the same ISP >at the same time should yield identical results. If the results are >not the same (a post showing up in rec.ponds but not >rec.ponds.moderated) one may reliably assume that something in the >moderation chain is responsible. Oh, it is quite clear. I get the standard form message from devnull at whereever, telling me that I must have used prohibited words (without telling me what they are) and that I can resubmit it if I think there is an error. (I never crosspost.) Every post. I suspect that it is objecting to somethnig (still no guesses as to what) in the message headers. I'd wondered if it hated my domain name, but your post quotes that, so it probably isn't the issue. I know enough about Usenet to work around this, but I dislike doing so. So I usually just don't post. I don't like that solution, as I plan on putting a pond in this spring and may have design questions over the winter. >We are currently trying to figure out and track down the problem of >"missing posts." Simply saying to the operator of the server that >hosts the moderation software that some of our posts are missing >doesn't bode well for resolution of an intermittent problem. It would >be far, far better to provide examples (complete with full headers). Mine aren't missing, just blocked/bounced. -- Drew Lawson | Radioactive cats have drew@furrfu.com | 18 half-lives http://www.furrfu.com/ |

In article <1194323848.227097.50620@z9g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, Phyllis and Jim <jimandphyllisrp@gmail.com> wrote: > I am chiming in as an individual. > > Thank you, Chris, for contributing about potential software options. > > I am delighted that the preparation for next year's software rental > fee has opened up the possibility of cost-free moderation software. I > think all of the moderators would love to have no-cost software! > > I would like to move in a both/and direction for the moment: BOTH > raise funds so we will not be without software AND see if we can get > an effective free alternative. If we can get it in place before we > have to pay the software use fee, good and we can refund the monies > donated. If we can't get it in place fast enough, we can move ahead > with rental and keep looking without leaving rpm without moderation. > > Jim My question would be, just how bad could an unmoderated board for ponds be? It's not political, religious or controversial, and aside from bulk spam or the occasional flamer, I don't see the value of a omderated board except to be a lot of work for someone. I subscribe to about 20 Usenet groups, and none of them are moderated. They manage to do fine. Most everyone knows how to use a killfile, anyway. Just my 2 cents. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space"

In article <labolide-9A2939.08330909112007@news.giganews.com> Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> writes: >My question would be, just how bad could an unmoderated board for ponds >be? Surprisingly bad. >It's not political, religious or controversial, and aside from bulk >spam or the occasional flamer, I don't see the value of a omderated >board except to be a lot of work for someone. I'm not sure anymore who were villians and who were victims in rec.ponds, but suffice it to say that some people have a lot of energy for making trouble, or for making sure that others' fun is ruined. >I subscribe to about 20 >Usenet groups, and none of them are moderated. They manage to do fine. >Most everyone knows how to use a killfile, anyway. Killfiles are of much less use when there is a problem with forged posting addresses. That was going on, as was some pretending to have been forged, etc. -- Drew Lawson And I know there's more to the story I know I need to see more drew@furrfu.com I need to see s'more, hear s'more feel s'more. I gotta be s'more

"Kurt" wrote: > > My question would be, just how bad could an unmoderated board for ponds > be? It's not political, religious or controversial, and aside from bulk > spam or the occasional flamer, I don't see the value of a omderated > board except to be a lot of work for someone. I subscribe to about 20 > Usenet groups, and none of them are moderated. They manage to do fine. > Most everyone knows how to use a killfile, anyway. > > Just my 2 cents. Wow. For a preview, drop in over at rec.ponds. It used to be worse. San Diego Joe 4,000 - 5,000 Gallons. Koi, Goldfish, and RES named Colombo.

In article <C35A1D8E.3D550%joe@bizqwick.com>, San Diego Joe <joe@bizqwick.com> wrote: > "Kurt" wrote: > > > > > > My question would be, just how bad could an unmoderated board for ponds > > be? It's not political, religious or controversial, and aside from bulk > > spam or the occasional flamer, I don't see the value of a omderated > > board except to be a lot of work for someone. I subscribe to about 20 > > Usenet groups, and none of them are moderated. They manage to do fine. > > Most everyone knows how to use a killfile, anyway. > > > > Just my 2 cents. > > Wow. For a preview, drop in over at rec.ponds. It used to be worse. > > I dropped in today after never having been there. Scrolled through last 2 months posts. You have the prolific cross spammer bobandcarole and a few others easily killfiled. He hit a few groups I was in a while back, but disappeared after a few emails to his news service. Amazed that he gets in that group. The rest are related. The problem I see is that many of the pond group were constantly responding to these posts. Easy solution: If they don't get attention they gradually stop posting. Don't respond. Email their news provider, don't waste time responding to their baiting. No posts in that entire group today. Using the killfile feature is really all you need. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space"

In article <kmiaj31is84fi94isek4358div798mjc2v@4ax.com>, ~ jan <Seewebsite@jjspond.us> wrote: > On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 22:04:40 CST, Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> wrote: > > >Easy solution: If they don't get attention they gradually stop posting. > >Don't respond. Email their news provider, don't waste time responding to > >their baiting. > > > >No posts in that entire group today. > > > >Using the killfile feature is really all you need. > > Two years of suggesting/doing the above, some just wouldn't do it or play > nice. The current RP is no history of what it was a year ago. My killfile > was so huge, it would have taken a ream of paper to print it off. And let's > not forget the nonsense flooding that still occurs. ~ jan > ------------ > Zone 7a, SE Washington State > Ponds: www.jjspond.us But now that group has had no posts in 2 days. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space"

In article <pssbj356ivhuqvpg06qn0uiip3pmo9isfs@4ax.com>, rons515@localnet.com wrote: > On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 11:51:33 CST, Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> > wrote: > > >In article <kmiaj31is84fi94isek4358div798mjc2v@4ax.com>, > > ~ jan <Seewebsite@jjspond.us> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 22:04:40 CST, Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> >Easy solution: If they don't get attention they gradually stop posting. > >> >Don't respond. Email their news provider, don't waste time responding to > >> >their baiting. > >> > > >> >No posts in that entire group today. > >> > > >> >Using the killfile feature is really all you need. > >> > >> Two years of suggesting/doing the above, some just wouldn't do it or play > >> nice. The current RP is no history of what it was a year ago. My killfile > >> was so huge, it would have taken a ream of paper to print it off. And let's > >> not forget the nonsense flooding that still occurs. ~ jan > >> ------------ > >> Zone 7a, SE Washington State > >> Ponds: www.jjspond.us > > > >But now that group has had no posts in 2 days. > > Trust me, it __would__ start again. > You would need to know more about who some of our trolls were, > and why they were determined to destroy the group (which they > did). > > Have you ever used the "Agent" newsreader? If so, I could send > you a rar file containing all the messages from late-2004 till > late-2006. If you opened it and inserted it into Agent, you would > clearly see what the problem was. No amount of kill-filtering could > solve it. > But what was _far_ worse, the atmosphere was so poisoned > that any newcomers who dropped in were immediately driven off. > Old-timers could use the medicine (kill-filters) and maybe hang on, > but the community itself was so poisoned that the result was fatal. > > (Actually, I have most of the messages of rec.ponds packaged, > going back to the late 90's -the good old days that lasted til > 2005.) > > (In case you're wondering who I am, I helped get rpm started > last fall/winter.) > > Ron Schompert > > PS: A one-year anniversary is coming up on Nov. 25th. On that day, a > guy named George naively suggested the idea of starting a moderated > group. > I've never heard of such ferocious and consistant attacks on a group that, in theory, should lack any sort of controversy, and I've been in some pretty wild ones. The rec.ponds group had over 10,000 posts archived through my news service. Saw a lot of the usual suspects who had been cross spamming everywhere, but most were just a lot of the usual yahoos that get into every group. Guess ponders are a stranger bunch than I thought... ;-) I shy away from PCs, so I use the excellent MTNewswatcher on our Macs. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space"

In article <1194698393.956898.286470@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, Phyllis and Jim <jimandphyllisrp@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Kurt, > > I wondered the same thing when we began to have spammers and > conflictual posters on rec.ponds. I enjoyed the group greatly. Take > a look at rec.ponds now...or go over selected months for the last > couple of years. It provides a direct answer to 'how bad'. The > moderated group seems to me a wonderful alternative to the sad state > of the unmoderated group. > Yes, I glanced through a few months worth. Were these good ponders gone bad? ;-) I can't imagine how that group attracted all that malice. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space"

In article <1194741006.682472.161670@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>, Phyllis and Jim <jimandphyllisrp@gmail.com> wrote: > I am not sure what happened. If you review the posts after about > 2005, you get a very quick idea of the hostilities and where they were > focused. Others could probably describe it to you. Speaking for > myself, I love having a group that is without the rancor of the > trolled rec.ponds. It feels rather like the old days before the > trolls. I thought they would quit when folks did not respond. Not > so. I thought they would tire. Not so. The goal was very much to > destroy the group. That brought the attacking of everything. > > Jim "BC" has probably never even been to rec.ponds, and neither have all those who jumped in the fray to respond. It's all from cross-posting, so you're not seeing anything personally directed to that group. The idea is to inflame multiple groups. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space"

In article <24mcj3l39e8hnpt739fiu7us1qb4fhj4in@4ax.com>, ~ jan <Seewebsite@jjspond.us> wrote: > On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 18:14:17 CST, Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> wrote: > > >Were these good ponders gone bad? ;-) > > Or showing their true colors from the comforts of their closets? ;-) > > Coincidence that RP is being flooded today? Makes me wonder if they're > still seeing RPM as a threat that we might go back there. Some people have > too much time on their hands. ~ jan > ------------ > Zone 7a, SE Washington State > Ponds: www.jjspond.us It's only those same two posters who cross-post spam to many unrelated Usenet groups. The problem is when everyone feels the need to respond to them, and cross-post back across a million groups. They've most likely never actually been to rec.ponds. I forgot that I have them kill-filed out of all my other groups- been that long since I've seen one of their posts. -- To reply by email, remove the word "space"