[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: SRH : Improvement of Hindu newsgroups is the goal
Vivek Sadananda Pai <vivek@cs.rice.edu> wrote:
>In article <4di8di$fov@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
>Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <rbalasub@ecn.purdue.edu> wrote:
>>Vivek Sadananda Pai <vivek@cs.rice.edu> wrote:
>[...]
>>>If I'm advertising an event which will take place in 4 days, then I
>>>probably won't be sending an announcement to a moderated group which
>>>doesn't clear articles that quickly.
>>
>>If you are advertising for something which takes place in 4 days, not many
>>people outside your town will come in such a short notice.
>
>Then we can extend the analogy, and quite reasonably so - let's say
No, not reasonably so. Delays of 10 days, I'd think have been quite rare. In
anycase I think the sci.info would have been set up because of a large number
of info postings. In srh we don't have so many now. The only info posts I
remember have been from Mr Stanley Rice about the SAT.
>that I'm advertising something that's going to happen in 14 days, but
>for some reason, the next approval event doesn't occur for 10 days. As
>a result, the effective notice becomes only 4 days. That's why you see
>more info posts on SCI.
>
>>>How will switching a group from unmoderated to auto-moderated reduce
>>>delays?
Oops, sorry. In my original post I said "having a talk like group which is auto
moderated will have less delays". I meant less delays than srh (the present srh
i.e). I didn't notice the unmoderated and read it as moderated and replied
again. My mistake.
>>BTW, I'm also aginst the rule in the RFD forbidding excerpts from books. If
>>the guy posting has got permission and the stuff has relevance, why not?
>
>The rule you envision doesn't exist - if the person has permission,
>copyrighted works are indeed allowed under the reorg RFD. The
>restrictions placed on using copyrighted works stem from the "fair
>use" guidelines of US law, specifically:
OK, I misunderstood this part. But in any case this was a minor concern. You
did not address my major concerns
1. Having an unmoderated group will increase spams. (Make $$$$, * Websites,
gifs wanted etc)
2. You conveniently snipped out the part where I explained why political posts
should NOT be banned outright from the moderated group.
I am willing to even change my mind on the info group, but definitely not on
the two points mentioned above. A compromise I could think of would be a talk
group + a moderated srh with N moderators with no outright ban on political
postings (as long as they have relevance to the Hindu religion, do not
promote hatred or indulge in speculations).
Ramakrishnan.
--
That it does not see in that state is because, though seeing then, it does not
see; for the vision of the witness can never be lost, because it is imperish-
able. But, there is not that second thing separate from it which it can see.
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad - IV.iii.23
