Pre-RFD: uk.rec.cycling.moderated

Below is a draft of the formal RFD I plan to use to start the official
newsgroup creation process. I've been informally advised by a member
of the usenet.org.uk Committee that we should sort out the exact
proposed charter before taking the matter forward.

So please take a look at the message below, and put forward your
opinions. In particular:
* Have I got the core of the charter right ?
* Is this the right moderation policy ?
* Is this the right crossposting policy ?
* Is it right to make discussion of the moderation policy
on topic in urcm ?
* Is everyone happy for me to host the moderation panel email
list and the moderation robot ? (I've had contributions of
some good-looking code changes to STUMP so I imagine we'll
be using that.)

Also, we need some moderators. If you would like to put yourself
forward, or suggest someone else, please post here in this thread.
If you have problems with potential moderators, feel free also to
email me privately if you prefer.

I think we should be looking for a panel of around six moderators.
I'm willing to volunteer. If you think I'd be a bad choice, please
say so here or privately.

Note that I have many of the trolls firmly killfiled. So please don't
reply to the trolls in this thread, or reply to anyone else's replies
to the trolls. Otherwise I may miss your important contributions.


From: Ian Jackson
Subject: RFD: uk.rec.cycling.moderated
Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling,uk.net.news.config,uk.net.news.anno unce
Followup-to: uk.rec.cycling,uk.net.news.config

uk.rec.cycling has for some time been suffering from an infestation of
trolls, nym-shifters and forgeries. Many of these posters are hostile
to cycling. There has even been real-world harassement such as
abusive late night phone calls. Repetitive flamage now constitutes
50-75% of the group by number of articles. This ongoing and worsening
problem has been making the group nearly unuseable for ordinary
discussion.

I therefore propose that we should create:

uk.rec.cycling.moderated Cycling in the UK (Moderated)


CHARTER

This group is for the discussion of all matters relating to cycling
in the UK. Recreational cycling, cycling for transport, racing, and
other forms of cycling are all on-topic.

Moderation will be used to ensure that the group remains civil,
pleasant, and sympathetic to cyclists and cycling.

The moderators may, as they see fit to achieve these goals: approve,
reject, robomodorate, whitelist, blacklist, make enquiries, write and
change detailed procedures or policies, delegate, and/or take other
reasonable measures.

In case of disagreement amongst the moderators, the majority of the
moderation panel shall prevail. The moderation panel may vote to
dismiss or appoint moderators.

Crossposting to uk.rec.cycling is not normally permitted.
Constructive discussion of the moderation policy is permitted in the
newsgroup itself.

uk.rec.cycling will remain as an unmoderated alternative; articles
which are unsympathetic to cycling (for example, vehement opposition
to cycling or cyclists, and full and frank discussions of transport
policy) may be posted there or to other unmoderated groups in uk.*.


Initial Moderators:

To be determined


INITIAL MODERATION POLICY

Postings should be conducive to a civil and pleasant atmosphere,
and remain sympathetic to cyclists and cycling. Each moderator will
accept or reject postings based on their own judgement.

The moderators will operate a whitelist system: new posters' messages
will be manually moderated by whichever moderator happens to get to
them first. Individual moderators may, when they consider a poster
sensible, add the poster to the whitelist; whitelisted posters'
messages will thereafter be posted automatically. Individual
moderators may remove a poster from the whitelist, when they post
inappropriate or borderline messages.

Decisions by individual moderators to approve or reject postings may
be appealed to the whole moderation panel. The panel would prefer
this to be done privately to make it easier for the panel to overrule
a mistaken moderator without anyone losing face.

This policy will be updated by the moderation panel as they see fit.

The moderators can be reached at

http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/urcm/


DISCUSSION

Discussion should be crossposted to uk.rec.cycling and
uk.net.news.config. Only messages posted to uk.net.news.config form
part of the official discussion.

Readers from uk.rec.cycling are encouraged to read the discussion in
uk.net.news.config just in case some articles are not properly
crossposted to urc.

Readers in uk.net.news.config should be aware that this proposal is
likely to attract opposition from the trolls, and that many of the
likely readers of uk.rec.cycling.moderated have those trolls killfiled
- so adverse conclusions should not be drawn if such posts sometimes
go unanswered.


--
Ian Jackson personal email:
These opinions are my own. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ijackson/
PGP2 key 1024R/0x23f5addb, fingerprint 5906F687 BD03ACAD 0D8E602E FCF37657

On 26 May, 17:25, Ian Jackson wrote:
DRAFT RFD

Hi Ian,
Thank you very very much for starting this off. It looks
pretty good to me at a first glance, but will think about it some
more. I am certainly happy for you to be a moderator, and host the
moderation list email and the robot. I will need to think further
about whether or not discussion of the moderation policy is on topic -
I feel it should be probably, but there are risks attached. If I go
silent for a few days it is because I will be in Edinburgh and mostly
away from email/usenet etc

Rudi

PS I am happy to volunteer as one of a panel of moderators if this is
appropriate. Of course the people who have so disrupted urc will put
themselves forwards as moderators. Obviously if this attempt to get a
cycling friendly group is to succeed this should be prevented.

On May 26, 5:50*pm, RudiL wrote:
On 26 May, 17:25, Ian Jackson wrote:
DRAFT RFD

Hi Ian,
* * * * *Thank you very very much for starting this off. It looks
pretty good to me at a first glance, but will think about it some
more. I am certainly happy for you to be a moderator, and host the
moderation list email and the robot. I will need to think further
about whether or not discussion of the moderation policy is on topic -
I feel it should be probably, but there are risks attached. If I go
silent for a few days it is because I will be in Edinburgh and mostly
away from email/usenet etc

Rudi

PS I am happy to volunteer as one of a panel of moderators if this is
appropriate. Of course the people who have so disrupted urc will put
themselves forwards as moderators. Obviously if this attempt to get a
cycling friendly group is to succeed this should be prevented.

This all makes sense.

Anything to stop these safespeed loons from disrupting the forum
further- they forced the closure of Cycling Plus via similar threats
and intimidation.

spindrift wrote:
On May 26, 5:50 pm, RudiL wrote:
On 26 May, 17:25, Ian Jackson wrote:
DRAFT RFD

Hi Ian,
Thank you very very much for starting this off. It looks
pretty good to me at a first glance, but will think about it some
more. I am certainly happy for you to be a moderator, and host the
moderation list email and the robot. I will need to think further
about whether or not discussion of the moderation policy is on topic -
I feel it should be probably, but there are risks attached. If I go
silent for a few days it is because I will be in Edinburgh and mostly
away from email/usenet etc

Rudi

PS I am happy to volunteer as one of a panel of moderators if this is
appropriate. Of course the people who have so disrupted urc will put
themselves forwards as moderators. Obviously if this attempt to get a
cycling friendly group is to succeed this should be prevented.

This all makes sense.

Anything to stop these safespeed loons from disrupting the forum
further- they forced the closure of Cycling Plus via similar threats
and intimidation.


Be careful what you wish for! A very good case could be made for
censoring the majority of both Doug's and your posts as being "loons"

You think?

What have I posted that justifies that please?

spindrift wrote:
You think?

I do.

What have I posted that justifies that please?

I don't have any reference to hand( I delete posts as a I read them, and
you have been killfiled for months) but your repeated postings of news
about non-cycling traffic events/offences for example.
To be honest I'm not at all keen on any sort of "moderation", but I
would imagine that many of those that clamour for "them" to be shut
up/out would also be clamoured against( Grammar?) by others.
Want to put money on the nuxx thing , the judith thing and the new bod
thing all wanting to see Guy censored?

Ian Jackson wrote:


Moderation will be used to ensure that the group remains civil,
pleasant, and sympathetic to cyclists and cycling.


Postings should be conducive to a civil and pleasant atmosphere,
and remain sympathetic to cyclists and cycling. Each moderator will
accept or reject postings based on their own judgement.



Does this include the idea of 'critical friend'?
In as much as illustrating poor cycling habits but not of the '****wit
runs red lights' variety which is common as muck in all cycling (and
many non-cycling) ng's.

Having trained adults to cycle I reckon they should all at least be able
to do this lot (from local council website for adult cycle training)
(how many can manage no. 13?)


Level 1
Complete beginner

You will be able to:

1. Carry out a simple bike check
2. Demonstrate understanding of safety equipment and clothing
3. Get on and off the bike
4. Start off and pedal
5. Stop the bike
6. Ride along independently
7. Make the bike go where they wish it to go (control the bike)
8. Use the gears correctly (if applicable)
9. Stop quickly and under control
10. Swerve to avoid objects
11. Look all around including behind, with control
12. Signal right and left with control
13. Look behind whilst signalling left and right with control



Damn, here come the trolls


--

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.

'your repeated postings of news
about non-cycling traffic events/offences for example. '

Um, I've never done that. What are you talking about?

On 26 May, 17:50, RudiL wrote:
On 26 May, 17:25, Ian Jackson wrote:
DRAFT RFD

Hi Ian,
* * * * *Thank you very very much for starting this off. It looks
pretty good to me at a first glance, but will think about it some
more. I am certainly happy for you to be a moderator, and host the
moderation list email and the robot. I will need to think further
about whether or not discussion of the moderation policy is on topic -
I feel it should be probably, but there are risks attached. If I go
silent for a few days it is because I will be in Edinburgh and mostly
away from email/usenet etc

Rudi

PS I am happy to volunteer as one of a panel of moderators if this is
appropriate. Of course the people who have so disrupted urc will put
themselves forwards as moderators. Obviously if this attempt to get a
cycling friendly group is to succeed this should be prevented.

Hi Ian,
I am not sure about not normally allowing cross-posting to
urc. This may be sensible as it would keep moderator work down as we
wouldn't get quite so much trolling in reply to perfectly ordinary
posts. However wouldn't the robomoderator mechanism deal with most of
this? I am *not* arguing cross-posting should be allowed, just
expressing some uncertainty in my view.

Additionally I would like to propose the new group should have a
regular (weekly?) posting to urc to advertise the existence of urcm to
any regular cyclists who drop in there expecting to see normal cycling
related discussions.

Rudi

spindrift wrote:
'your repeated postings of news
about non-cycling traffic events/offences for example. '

Um, I've never done that.


"Of course you haven't Malcolm!"
What are you talking about?

I'll point it out to you the next time you start?