Hi all,

7 rmgroup articles were sent in January for de.alt.*, signed with a PGP key. Are they legitimate removals? Should a specific PGP key and a rule for
de.alt* be added in control.ctl?

I guess the next checkgroups for de.* (signed with the de.* PGP key) will
take into account these removals, if legitimate.
Yet, it might be useful to integrate a de.alt.* key in order to process
changes sooner.

2022-01-09 22:20:02 [28266] <rmgroup-de.alt.comp.sap-r3-20220109@thangorodrim.ancalagon.de> archived as de.alt.comp.sap-r3
2022-01-14 19:10:02 [3343] <rmgroup-de.alt.games.schach-20220114@thangorodrim.ancalagon.de> archived as de.alt.games.schach
2022-01-14 19:10:02 [3343] <rmgroup-de.alt.fan.fruehstyxradio-20220114@thangorodrim.ancalagon.de> archived as de.alt.fan.fruehstyxradio
2022-01-14 19:10:02 [3343] <rmgroup-de.alt.comm.webzwonull-20220114@thangorodrim.ancalagon.de> archived as de.alt.comm.webzwonull

2022-01-22 02:10:01 [14484] <rmgroup-de.alt.paranormal-20220122@thangorodrim.ancalagon.de> archived as de.alt.paranormal
2022-01-22 02:10:01 [14484] <rmgroup-de.alt.music.jazz-20220122@thangorodrim.ancalagon.de> archived as de.alt.music.jazz
2022-01-29 21:40:01 [10330] <rmgroup-de.alt.soc.punk-20220129@thangorodrim.ancalagon.de> archived as de.alt.soc.punk

--
Julien ÉLIE

« Il buvait toutes mes paroles, et comme je parlais beaucoup, à un
moment, je le vois qui titubait… » (Raymond Devos)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Julien ÉLIE <iulius@nom-de-mon-site.com.invalid> writes:

7 rmgroup articles were sent in January for de.alt.*, signed with a PGP
key. Are they legitimate removals? Should a specific PGP key and a
rule for de.alt* be added in control.ctl?

The rmgroup messages were sent by thh@thh.name, it looks like. The
current entry for de.alt.* is:

## DE.ALT (German language alternative hierarchy)
# *PGP* See comment at top of file.
newgroup:*:de.alt.*:doit rmgroup:moderator@dana.de:de.alt.*:verify-de.admin.news.announce

so the rmgroups would be honored if they were sent from the normal de.*
control address and signed with the normal key.

I guess the next checkgroups for de.* (signed with the de.* PGP key) will take into account these removals, if legitimate.

This did indeed happen on the first of the month.

--
Russ Allbery (eagle@eyrie.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Russ Allbery schrieb:

rmgroup:moderator@dana.de:de.alt.*:verify-de.admin.news.announce

I think this was to prevent malicious deletions of groups, disrupting discussions; the malicios creation of groups was apparently not considered
to be as harmful.

so the rmgroups would be honored if they were sent from the normal de.* control address and signed with the normal key.

The denizens of de.alt.admin (the group were proposals for de.alt.* are discussed) of old would have frowned at this, as de.admin.news.announce
should have no powers in de.alt.*. :)

So I keep to the custom of sending control messages for de.alt.* signed
with my personal key.

-thh

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Julien ÉLIE schrieb:

7 rmgroup articles were sent in January for de.alt.*, signed with a PGP key. Are they legitimate removals? Should a specific PGP key and a rule for de.alt* be added in control.ctl?

Control messages in de.alt.* are customarily sent by the proponents of the respective proposals, signed by a personal key. The original assumption
was, I think, that admins will decide individually if they honor those messages, like alt.*, but that was before my time. :)

In practice control messages for de.alt.* are watched by the moderation of de.admin.news.announce which is sending checkgroups for de.* including
de.alt.* If there was no significant or well-founded protest against the proposal (that's all de.alt.* has for rules - perhaps something like rough consensus), the checkgroups message is adjusted accordingly, so newsgroups
will be created or removed as long as the checkgroup messages are honored.

For all other parts of de.* (i.e. de.!alt.*), there is a formal discussion
and voting system that had been modelled after the Big 8: a Request for Discussion (RfD) has to be posted to the moderated group de.admin.news.announce, followed by other RfDs or a Call for Votes. The
results are then implemented by the moderation of de.admin.news.announce
with new-/rmgroups signed with the hierarchy key.

I guess the next checkgroups for de.* (signed with the de.* PGP key) will take into account these removals, if legitimate.

The last checkgroups, sent on 2022-02-01, has done that (<checkgroups-2022-02@dana.de>).

Yet, it might be useful to integrate a de.alt.* key in order to process changes sooner.

There is no such thing as a key for de.alt.* :)

-thh

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Le Samedi 05 février 2022 à 22:05 UTC, Thomas Hochstein écrivait sur news.admin.hierarchies :

[snip]

-thh

Off topic here, but just to thank you for this :

<https://home.gegeweb.org/rfc8315.html>

@Julien E., a fr.alt.* could be an idea, no ?

--
On ne le dira jamais assez, l'anarchisme, c'est l'ordre sans le
gouvernement ; c'est la paix sans la violence. C'est le contraire
précisément de tout ce qu'on lui reproche, soit par ignorance, soit
par mauvaise foi. -+- Hem Day -+-

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi Thomas,

Control messages in de.alt.* are customarily sent by the proponents of the respective proposals, signed by a personal key. The original assumption
was, I think, that admins will decide individually if they honor those messages, like alt.*, but that was before my time. :)

Thanks for the explanation!
So, there's nothing to change in the control.ctl entry if I understand
well. If an admin decides to honour those messages, he just has to
change the corresponding entry to match your e-mail address and PGP key.

--
Julien ÉLIE

« A program should always respond to the user in the way that astonishes
him least. » (Plauger's Law of Least Astonishment)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Bonjour Gérald,

@Julien E., a fr.alt.* could be an idea, no ?

I suggested it last year on fufe (fr.usenet.forums.evolution) when we
spoke of the good ideas from other hierarchies, but it did not take
support for reasons I do not recall.
This fr.alt.* would have laxed rules of creations and removals, without
any approval from a Board. The name of the newsgroup should just be appropriate (no offense, no weird stuff). And maybe an upper number for
the creation of newsgroups in the row (it is useless to create
newsgroups which remain empty or for only 1 person... a rule might be
that there is no more creation when such a thing happens). If the theme
of the group is already in fr.*, it cannot also be created in fr.alt.*.

I think it could be something worth trying for fr.*; maybe the usual
trollers will at least cease to complain...
And they could even have their own fr.alt.admin.announce newsgroup for
fr.alt.* :-)

--
Julien ÉLIE

« A program should always respond to the user in the way that astonishes
him least. » (Plauger's Law of Least Astonishment)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

Am 07.02.2022 um 20:51 schrieb Julien ÉLIE:

Hi Thomas,

Control messages in de.alt.* are customarily sent by the proponents of
the
respective proposals, signed by a personal key. The original assumption
was, I think, that admins will decide individually if they honor those
messages, like alt.*, but that was before my time. :)

Thanks for the explanation!
So, there's nothing to change in the control.ctl entry if I understand well.  If an admin decides to honour those messages, he just has to
change the corresponding entry to match your e-mail address and PGP key.

It should however be noted, that the official recommended settings for
de.alt.* [1, 2] differ from the default control.ctl file. I am not sure
if that has historical reasons.

Cheers,
Martin

[1] <http://dana.de/tech-info.html#control>
[2] <public-checkgroups-2022-02@dana.de>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Martin Burmester <martin@burmester.org> writes:

It should however be noted, that the official recommended settings for de.alt.* [1, 2] differ from the default control.ctl file. I am not sure
if that has historical reasons.

As a matter of policy the default control.ctl file does not allow rmgroups
from * except for defunct hierarchies. There's too much potential for
abuse and sabotage. (I think that's reflected everywhere; let me know if
I missed something.)

I have a whole bunch of major updates I want to do to that file, including better documentation of things like that, but alas haven't found the
time....

--
Russ Allbery (eagle@eyrie.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Julien ÉLIE schrieb:

So, there's nothing to change in the control.ctl entry if I understand
well.

Yes, that is correct.

If an admin decides to honour those messages, he just has to
change the corresponding entry to match your e-mail address and PGP key.

They shouldn't, as it's more or less coincidence [1] that I'm sending
those control messages; everyone could do the same, after following
procedure.

-thh

[1] A bit less as there are not so many people left that are interested in creating or removing groups, but I think that's much the same in the Big 8
or fr.* or anywhere else.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

Julien ÉLIE a tapoté le 07/02/2022 20:44:

I think it could be something worth trying for fr.*; maybe the usual
trollers will at least cease to complain...
And they could even have their own fr.alt.admin.announce newsgroup for fr.alt.* :-)

Will the Control message be signed by Control?
For de.alt, I've seen errors in Inn Report. But I don't have users for
de.*.
I didn't really understood how it is really working in de.alt.* or in a probably fr.alt.*
There is still some servers which don't have accepted the new key for
fr, so will the fr.alt will be really created? ...

--
Stéphane
Sorry for my bad English...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Bonsoir Stéphane,

I think it could be something worth trying for fr.*; maybe the usual
trollers will at least cease to complain...
And they could even have their own fr.alt.admin.announce newsgroup for
fr.alt.* :-)

Will the Control message be signed by Control?

I can, I don't mind doing that.

Or I could also create a second key for fr.alt.* (this way, news servers wanting fr.alt.* could just trust that second key, and other more
conservative ones could keep the fr.* hierarchy in the "stone age" they
like).

There is still some servers which don't have accepted the new key for
fr, so will the fr.alt will be really created? ...

No, as you can guess...
Anyway, these servers also won't create any other newsgroups in fr.*.

--
Julien ÉLIE

« Vna salus uictis, nullam sperare salutem. » (Énée de Virgile)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: fr.usenet.forums.evolution

Julien ÉLIE <iulius@nom-de-mon-site.com.invalid> composa la prose suivante:

Bonsoir Stéphane,

I think it could be something worth trying for fr.*; maybe the usual
trollers will at least cease to complain...
And they could even have their own fr.alt.admin.announce newsgroup for
fr.alt.* :-)

Will the Control message be signed by Control?

I can, I don't mind doing that.

Or I could also create a second key for fr.alt.* (this way, news servers >wanting fr.alt.* could just trust that second key, and other more >conservative ones could keep the fr.* hierarchy in the "stone age" they >like).

nah version:
Maybe you could also delete fr.usenet.forums.evolution since it seems
that the discussions are done here (news.admin.hierarchie) and that the consensus obtained on the appropriate French forum is nowadays
without interest for fufa.

Version fufe:
Peut-être pourriez vous aussi supprimer fr.usenet.forums.evolution
puisqu'il semble que les discussions se fasse ici et que les consensus
obtenues sur le forum francophone idoine soit de nos jours sans intérêt
pour fufa.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)