Re: URCM makes itself look ridiculous again!.

On 19/03/2010 22:53, Jim A wrote:
Clive George wrote:
On 19/03/2010 21:24, Jim A wrote:
Derek C wrote:
It seems that because I believe that wearing cycle helmets might be a
good idea, I have become a persona non grata to the URCM moderators. I
have therefore had another posting rejected that had nothing to do
with helmets whatsoever!

That Chiark server helpfully shows the entire rejection email too:

http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~webstump/g.urcm/messages/nr--3c5ba0343e-2da7f2-2d4c0a-2d892d-2d86a78da51d9b-40r27g2000yqn-2egooglegroups-2ecom-3e.txt



Why do they bother rejecting posts if they publish them online anyway?

Are you utterly ignorant of the stream of people asking for the
rejects to be available?

Evidently so!

Discussed at great length in uk.net.news.moderation - a very broad consensus that posting rejects in eg the website would be a good thing, much as other moderated NGs do. There was even a small amount of discussion of whether new moderated NGs should be mandated to do something like that.

The rejects are on the website, but don't get in the way of people reading the group. That way people can inspect moderation decisions if they want, or just happily read the NG.

.

Relevant Pages