From: vanguard.news@yahooNIX.com 
  
 "D. Kirkpatrick"  wrote in message 
 news:sunclad-0B7B90.23243328032006@news.verizon.net... 
 > 
 > The moderator can return the message with edits via e-mail explaining 
 > why the message is refused, delete it outright, or route it to his 
 > local NNTP server. 
  
 That's what I thought.  In other discussions or articles, it wasn't 
 clear WHOSE newsserver was getting use to *allow* the post.  The poster 
 obviously submits their message to their own NNTP server but it seemed 
 the moderator would have to use their own NNTP server, the one to which 
 they had a privileged account that would let them actually get the post 
 to show up (so it didn't go through the moderation process again).  So 
 the post, if allowed, propagates out from the moderator's NNTP server. 
  
 > From my standpoint the problem with moderation is the lack of a decent 
 > program that will allow one to easily handle the task or even alow a 
 > group of people handle the task. 
  
 The only software that I ran across in patching together all the Googled 
 articles was mention of MajorDomo (which has to use a mail program, like 
 sendmail).  It's a mailing list manager.  I think it gets the e-mail 
 notice (from the original poster's NNTP server) and then sends it out to 
 the moderators. 
  
 > It is true that you can over-ride the approval line if you have 
 > software that allows that to be done.  However so far I am the only 
 > person in my group, and the former moderator of the group, that are 
 > savvy enough or have the tools to do it. 
  
 For security in controlling who can allow the post, I figured the 
 moderator would have an account with their own NNTP server that would 
 *not* initiate the notify process that other posters would encounter on 
 their NNTP host or even for those that post to the same NNTP host as the 
 moderator.  That is, only the moderator could add the Approve header 
 with their e-mail address that matched the account they used to allow 
 the post, and only their account would not initiate the moderation 
 process (to notify the moderators).  But that would mean the moderator 
 would need to get special permission from their NNTP provider so any 
 posts submitted by the moderator did not initiate the moderation 
 process. 
  
 That's not true (that the moderator needs a special account)?  If not, 
 and since there are many NNTP clients that let the user add headers 
 on-the-fly or configure to add them always, it seems the lack of 
 requiring a special moderator account to the NNTP host would leave 
 moderation susceptible to spoofing by non-moderators.  Maybe it isn't a 
 problem since the NNTP provider could tell who was spoofing and kill 
 that abusive user's account but that only works if the NNTP host 
 required registration to use it (and there are many freebie NNTP 
 providers).  I realize that Usenet was developed at a time when being 
 open was a good thing, but nowadays it seems that moderation needs a bit 
 more security against malcontents. 
  
 > Occasionally a troll-like person pops in to be a problem but they tend 
 > to be gone soon enough.  An IP trace and complaint to their service 
 > provider are often enough to get that stopped.  Provided of course the 
 > service provider is in the USA and is not some putz operation.  Those 
 > few and foreign systems can be a problem. 
 > 
 > With the advent of private systems at Yahoo, Google, and a few others, 
 > and the availability of message board ware for Windows or Unix/Linux, 
 > the ever-popular PHP, etc, moderated newsgroups may quickly become 
 > dinosaurs. 
  
 That's one of the reasons why I visit the forums or "private" groups at 
 Yahoo.  For example, I want to discuss coding and problems with 
 WinRunner (a software testing tool) with other users but don't want to 
 bother with the trolls.  Even in the game forums, I'm used to their Iron 
 Claw policy to keep the group focused and get rid of abusive users.  For 
 Usenet, I'm a bit more used to the free-for-all attitude and haven't 
 really found a topic of interest that also had a moderated group for it 
 (and why I go hunting for forums or private groups).  The forums usually 
 have a team of moderators whereas the private groups too often have just 
 one dictator. 
  
 Alas, with ISPs dropping newsgroups support (and either contracting it 
 out so they don't provide any support or just dropping it entirely), I 
 have to wonder about the survivability of Usenet. 
  
 Thanks for all the helpful info. 
  
 -- 
 __________________________________________________ 
 Post replies to the newsgroup.  Share with others. 
 For e-mail: Remove "NIX" and add "#VN" to Subject. 
 __________________________________________________ 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)