• Moderator Vacancy Investigation: sci.physics.discrete

    From Ned Latham@21:1/5 to Steve Bonine on Thu Oct 29 21:43:37 2020
    Steve Bonine wrote:

    MODERATOR VACANCY INVESTIGATION (MVI)
    moderated group sci.physics.discrete

    This is a formal Moderator Vacancy Investigation (MVI), begun because moderated newsgroup sci.physics.discrete is not functioning, and may
    have been abandoned by its moderator(s).

    This investigation will attempt to verify the reasons for non-function,
    and may result in the removal of the group or the selection and
    installation of a new moderator. In practice, the Big-8 Management
    Board considers the third alternative -- changing the status of the
    group from moderated to unmoderated -- as likely to cause more harm than good.

    I have posted articles into s.p.d a few times, and have never seen them
    arrive. The reason for the group's lack of activity would therefore seem
    to lie with the moderator(s).

    Of the actions mooted to deal with it, my preference is for the second.

    Cheers,

    Ned

    ----snip----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Adam H. Kerman@21:1/5 to Ned Latham on Fri Oct 30 11:56:39 2020
    Ned Latham <Ned@serv1.dca1.giganews.com> wrote:
    Steve Bonine wrote:

    MODERATOR VACANCY INVESTIGATION (MVI)
    moderated group sci.physics.discrete

    This is a formal Moderator Vacancy Investigation (MVI), begun because >>moderated newsgroup sci.physics.discrete is not functioning, and may
    have been abandoned by its moderator(s).

    This investigation will attempt to verify the reasons for non-function,
    and may result in the removal of the group or the selection and >>installation of a new moderator. In practice, the Big-8 Management
    Board considers the third alternative -- changing the status of the
    group from moderated to unmoderated -- as likely to cause more harm than >>good.

    I have posted articles into s.p.d a few times, and have never seen them >arrive. The reason for the group's lack of activity would therefore seem
    to lie with the moderator(s).

    Of the actions mooted to deal with it, my preference is for the second.

    Real cute there, not including the date on the attribution line.

    On Friday, June 17, 2011 6:27:31 PM UTC-7, Steve Bonine wrote:

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Steve Bonine@21:1/5 to Adam H. Kerman on Thu Nov 5 21:27:25 2020
    Adam H. Kerman wrote:

    Real cute there, not including the date on the attribution line.

    On Friday, June 17, 2011 6:27:31 PM UTC-7, Steve Bonine wrote:

    Thank you, Adam.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jason Evans@21:1/5 to Steve Bonine on Sun Nov 8 15:04:03 2020
    On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 21:27:25 CST, Steve Bonine wrote:


    Thank you, Adam.

    Of course, if anyone wants to take over moderation, we will be glad to
    help facilitate that.

    __
    JE

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Adam H. Kerman@21:1/5 to Jason Evans on Mon Nov 9 00:59:14 2020
    Jason Evans <jsevans@mailfence.com> wrote:
    On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 21:27:25 CST, Steve Bonine wrote:

    Thank you, Adam.

    Of course, if anyone wants to take over moderation, we will be glad to
    help facilitate that.

    I would urge you to come up with a new, general policy for proposed
    moderators, including technical competance, assistant moderators, and
    most important, a moderator succession policy.

    A sole moderator is obviously a single point of failure. You shouldn't
    allow that any more.

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