Discussion:
Charter for rec.music.practice
(too old to reply)
Bohgosity BumaskiL
2011-03-05 04:59:50 UTC
Permalink
For your newsgroups file, perhaps:
rec.music.practice Care and enjoyment in music practice (Moderated)

CHARTER:

C01 Description and Purpose

rec.music.practice would be a moderated newsgroup that provides a friendly,
respectful forum for discussion of all aspects of Mathematics, Phyics, and
psycho-acoustics that are relevant to music. rec.music.practice appeals to a
wide range of people people involved in both recreational and professional
aspects of establishing, maintaining, propagating, and rendering musical
repertoire. Participants range from novices to people with many years of
experience; from those with a day job, to those whose day job involves
music; from specialists to solo producers; serial to orchestral; enjineers,
scientists, and artists. Sharing ideas, asking questions, or lurking are
welcome from all who want to learn.

C02 The Following Is Prohibited

All posts containing these items will be rejected, and returned with
explanation if permitted by automated software.

* Excessive cross-posting, although limited, on-topic cross-posting
is permitted (many *servers* disallow more than five cross-postings)
* Commercial posts or Excessive Multiple Posting (bot actuated).
* Obscenities.
* Excessive morphing/nym shifting ("excessive" is at moderator discretion)
* Implied or direct threats, slander, insults, bigotry, prejudice
or harassment
* Flaming, baiting, flooding, and personal verbal attacks
* Unjustified kritisizm, especially unusable kriteek.
* Posts advocating violence or containing physical threats
* Attacks on others based on gender, race, sexual orientation
or religion
* Chain letters
* Binaries, other than pgp signatures, x-face headers, and other
ancillary article meta-data. Links are fine.
* Forgery of names, valid email addresses or approval headers
* Excessive quoting of old material, with little new content
(these will be judgment calls made by moderators)
* Personal identification information associated with anyone other
than yourself (e.g. residential addresses, phone numbers and
government identifications).
* Content advocating acts that would be intrinsically illegal
in most places
* Copyright violations. (However, pointers to news articles,
blogs, etc. that are on-topic are welcome. They must comply with
fair use standards.)


C03 Permitted Content
Discussions appropriate to a musical community include:

* Melody
* Harmony
* Counterpoint
* Baseline
* Dissonance
* Time Signatures
* Consonance (Archaically, Assonance)
* Chords, tablature, and numeric notation
* Just Intonation and Equal Temperament
* Temperament or tampering with established tunings
* Timbre Harmonics, patches, and transforms.
* History of Musicians and Temperament
* Publishing technique (How to use your web host)


C04 Charter Implementation

See Moderation Policy and Practice.

C05 Changes to Moderation Policy

Proposals for changes to this document can pass with a two thirds majority
vote. All who approve this document should send it to
mailto:***@big-8.org. It is up to their quorom rationale to decide whether
sufficient approval has been met. Changes may also be discussed in this
thread or proposed in a pre-amble of your submission to that board.

C07 (Most of Section Deleted under "If it goes without saying, then let it
go without saying.")

(Moderator Contact Addresses, first copy)

C08 Readership Participation & Responsibility

All participants in news:rec.music.practice may:

* Request changes to moderation policy and participate in discussion of
changes.
* Privately ask for all moderators to review a specific rejected
post (within practical numerical limits determined by moderators.)
* Nominate new moderators.

MODERATION POLICY: rec.music.practice


MPP01 Purpose

rec.music.practice would be a moderated newsgroup that provides a friendly,
respectful forum for discussion of all aspects of Mathematics, Phyics, and
psycho-acoustics that are relevant to music. rec.music.practice appeals to a
wide range of people involved in both recreational and professional aspects
of establishing, maintaining, propagating, and rendering musical repertoire.
Participants range from novices to people with many years of experience;
from those with a day job, to those whose day job involves music; from
specialists to solo producers; serial to orchestral; enjineers, scientists,
and artists. Sharing ideas, asking questions, or lurking are welcome from
all who want to learn.


MPP02 Automated (robotic) Moderation Software

Moderators should employ automated moderation software to initially screen
and pre-filter all incoming posts, and to ensure that all posts meet certain
current moderation policies. Posts that do not will be automatically
returned along with a brief explanation, provided that such posts have a
valid return address. All posts that are approved by automated software
will be forwarded to human moderators for further examination.


MPP03 Cross-posting

Cross-posting to related groups based on subject matter (e.g.,rec.music.*,
alt.music.*, and groups related to lyrics in links) will be allowed. No
cross-posting to irrelevant groups will be permitted. Such cross-posted
messages shall be returned, provided a valid return email address is
provided.


MPP04 Authorship of Posts

Anyone will be allowed to post as long as they are not forging another
poster's name or address. Anonymous posting will be allowed. Occasional
name-shifting may be permitted, but excessive name-shifting will not be
permitted, as per C03.


MPP05 Human Moderation

After approval by any automated software, messages are forwarded for review,
based upon C02 & C03. Rejected messages shall be returned to a poster,
provided a valid return address is available. An explanation for rejection
shall be included, and it may be automated in case of blocked senders.

Moderators do not add, delete, or edit anything within a post. Tags are not
added. With exceptions for bot-actuated rejection and anonymous submission,
a moderator randomly assigned will pass all rejected articles back to a
submitter, along with either guidance for changes, or a reason for rejection
of a subject. In rare cases, individuals who persist in sending material
that does not meet content guidelines in this charter will be blocked from
making submissions to any moderator: Inclusion of an individual on a block
list requires consent of two thirds of moderators, and it may happen without
collusion.

Moderators permit posts that may contain technically incorrect information,
provided that the post is not deemed to be deliberately deceptive. Any
approved post that is forwarded to this newsgroup, and contains incorrect
information, may and should be followed up by posts that attempt to correct
the misinformation. Such corrective posts may be made by any interested
person/s in the newsgroup.

All personal posts made by moderators go through the same complete process
as posts made by the general readership of the group. Moderators do not
review their own posts, nor those of a relative. Moderators who fail to
abide by the charter and current moderation policy may be warned or removed
by other moderators; two thirds of a majority.

Posting with a valid or mangled-and-decipherable (munged) e-mail address
enables accountability.


MPP06 Moderator Approval and Rejection Policies


Moderators may consult with one another before deciding to pass or reject a
post whose content is borderline or questionable. This consultation may add
to the time-delay of the processing of a post.

If a post is rejected, it may be appealed to the Moderation Team, provided
it is seen as a legitimate request, and not as a disruptive attempt or
tactic to distract or flood the team with large numbers of obviously
inappropriate messages.


MPP07 Personal Advertising


Very limited personal advertising shall be permitted. Such advertising must
be directly related to music marketing. The number of ads permitted by any
one poster per any given time period shall be left to the discretion of the
moderators, with all posters subject to the same conditions. Links on the
last line of a post (Loosely, signatures) that otherwise follows in a thread
do not count under this policy.


MPP08 Ending Threads

Moderators reserve the right to end a thread that has veered significantly
off-topic, or that has become dominated by rehashing and/or repetition.


MPP10 Structure of the Human Moderation Team


(ignore dates that I do not set)

The review and moderation of posts that are approved by the automated
software program will be conducted by a Moderation Team.

The first moderation team members will be divided into two classes, and
appointed for one or two year terms, to end on August 31, 2008 and 2009
respectively. Thereafter a new class of moderators will be elected annually
during the month of August, to serve two-year terms, beginning on September
1st of the election year and continuing through August 31st of the second
year after the election. The current moderation team will select each new
class of moderators, and election will be by a minimum 2/3 vote of the
current moderators.

The total number of moderators may be changed by the moderation team, which
will seek to maintain an equal number of members in each class. The general
readership of rec.music.practice are encouraged to propose/nominate
potential moderators to the team, as per C08.

Moderators may be re-elected. The moderation team shall elect persons to
fill vacancies using the 2/3 criterion for election.



MPP11 Head Moderator

The moderation team may choose to elect a (head/chief/administrative)
moderator by a majority vote, if it deems such a position to be necessary.
The duties and responsibilities of such a position would be determined as
needed.



MPP12 Moderator Removal

If a moderator does not abide by the charter and current moderation
policies, the other moderators may warn and, if necessary, remove that
moderator by a 2/3 majority vote of the moderation team. Moderators who wish
to resign for any reason may do so by emailing all other moderators.


MPP13 Changes to Moderation Policy & Practices

As stated in the Charter, moderation policy & practices (MPP) may be changed
to meet the permanent objectives of the Charter and the ongoing needs of the
newsgroup.

Proposed changes are announced by the moderators in the newsgroup, and the
general readership may discuss the proposed changes. Changes shall be
adopted by a 2/3 majority of the current moderators, and will be published
in the newsgroup.

As stated in C08, the general readership may suggest changes to policy and
practices.



MPP14 Moderator Posts

Moderators shall use [MODERATOR ANNOUNCE:] to preface official informational
posts to the readership of rec.music.practice.

MPP15 Moderator Contact Addresses

()

As per C07, moderators shall provide a contact email address for anyone who
wishes to make a complaint, question, or offer a suggestion.


PROPONENT:
JWL <***@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca>


CHANGE HISTORY

1. Began as rec.ponds.moderated.
2. Changed purpose and examined content.
3. Minor operational and practical changes made mostly to integrate sections
on moderator conduct and make policy online with software available.
4. Other aesthetic and readability changes made, for example I deleted the
paragraph that mentioned PGP, because the technology (maintained service,
really) to hide a pseudonym's ISP has existed for a decade, and actually in
The Onion Router, it has grown to layers upon layers of indirection.
5. Removed a lot of superfluous definite articles.
Bohgosity BumaskiL
2011-03-06 04:24:49 UTC
Permalink
Thanks for your prompt response, Alexander:
In the usual course of my noise control operations, I do not get very many
personal replies.
I usually just need to be happy with less noise.
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
rec.music.practice Care and enjoyment in music practice (Moderated)
[...]
CHANGE HISTORY
1. Began as rec.ponds.moderated.
Hello Jay,
I am glad to see that you are interested in creating a BIG8 newsgroup.
Unfortunately the proposal you sent us is not fit for publication in
news.announce.newgroups.
It is in general a good idea to write formal texts by remodeling a
template. In this specific case, however, the result is a proposal
that is hopelessly convoluted with trivia but leaves the important
questions unanswered.
I would recommend to start again, and work systematically.
There are currently 103 groups matching rec.music.*
Why do we need another one?
I am under the impression that none of them are moderated, and that it is
much easier to create a new moderated group than to add moderation to an
existing one.
What distinguishes r.m.p from the rest?
Nothing but moderation.
What is its unique selling proposition?
Without spam and gutter language, it would look a lot better than
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.theory/topics
What topics are not covered by existing groups?
The point of moderation is *reducing* the scope of existing groups, so in
mechanical terms, nothing. However, the subscription rate for a moderated
group is probably several times that of a heavily trolled group, so I
strongly suspect that traffic volume from informed participants (I named the
group to encourage performance) would increase. Correspondingly, lurkers
would increase.

This thread is entitled "Why I gave up R.M.T.": news:fbac4a12-0536-4d97-83b5-***@w19g2000yqb.googlegroups.com ,
and it is no wonder, since his server seems to be the most open server on
USENET.
What fragmented traffic should be consolidated in the new group?
Do you mean for me to recommend group deletion?
I suspect that group deletion is automatic when subscription to a group
drops to zero for long enough.
I do not foresee subscription to R.M.T. falling to zero.
Why does it have to be a moderated group?
That is in section C02.
Even robo-moderation for poison words would be an improvement.
I suspect that most of the troll volume in R.M.T. is a solo act
in one guy making scurrilous accusations against himself.
Who are the proposed moderators, anyway?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cluebot is very popular and surprizingly
prolific. So would a couzin of hiz on USENET be. If the board were to
approve mere robo-moderation for poison words, then I (and any other
would-be moderators) would see whether anything more needs to be done.
These questions are actually important. The charter should be a
brief summary of the answers.
I modelled the charter on rec.ponds.moderated, which was probably created to
make a group suitable for children. R.P.M now does a lot more traffic than
rec.ponds. I could start with R.P.M. again, and I would rather assign you to
the task, since you probably saw far more charters than I did.
The B8MB would be glad to help you. Either in private mail exchange,
or in the course of a discussion in news.groups.proposals.
If you do not mind, I will take that as a license to post your inquiry and
my responses, because making this an open process wiL educate somebody to
the fact that some news servers are more open than others. Even if my
proposal goes nowhere, it is a good thing that I could not figure out how to
make my twit filter in Mozilla Thunderbird work, because there are already
moderated mailing lists performing a similar function. They are harder to
find than R.M.P. would be.
________
http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/finance/Manual_Spam_Control.htm Stay Gruntled
Ciao
Alexander.
Bohgosity BumaskiL
2011-03-08 14:36:38 UTC
Permalink
For your newsgroups file, perhaps:
rec.music.practice Care and enjoyment in music practice (Moderated)

CHARTER:

C01 Description and Purpose

rec.music.practice would be a moderated newsgroup that provides a
friendly, respectful forum for discussion of all aspects of
Mathematics, Phyics, and psycho-acoustics that are relevant to music.
rec.music.practice appeals to a wide range of people people involved
in both recreational and professional aspects of establishing,
maintaining, propagating, and rendering musical repertoire.
Participants range from novices to people with many years of
experience; from those with a day job, to those whose day job
involves music; from specialists to solo producers; serial to
orchestral; enjineers, scientists, and artists. Sharing ideas, asking
questions, or lurking are welcome from all who want to learn.

C02 The Following Is Prohibited

All posts containing these items will be rejected, and returned with
explanation if permitted by automated software.

* Excessive cross-posting, although limited, on-topic cross-posting
is permitted (many *servers* disallow more than five
cross-postings)
* Commercial posts or Excessive Multiple Posting (bot actuated).
* Obscenities.
* Excessive morphing/nym shifting ("excessive" is at moderator
discretion)
* Implied or direct threats, slander, insults, bigotry, prejudice
or harassment
* Flaming, baiting, flooding, and personal verbal attacks
* Unjustified kritisizm, especially unusable kriteek.
* Posts advocating violence or containing physical threats
* Attacks on others based on gender, race, sexual orientation
or religion
* Chain letters
* Binaries, other than pgp signatures, x-face headers, and other
ancillary article meta-data. Links are fine.
* Forgery of names, valid email addresses or approval headers
* Excessive quoting of old material, with little new content
(these will be judgment calls made by moderators)
* Personal identification information associated with anyone other
than yourself (e.g. residential addresses, phone numbers and
government identifications).
* Content advocating acts that would be intrinsically illegal
in most places
* Copyright violations. (However, pointers to news articles,
blogs, etc. that are on-topic are welcome. They must comply with
fair use standards.)


C03 Permitted Content
Discussions appropriate to a musical community include:

* Melody
* Harmony
* Counterpoint
* Baseline
* Dissonance
* Time Signatures
* Consonance (Archaically, Assonance)
* Chords, tablature, and numeric notation
* Just Intonation and Equal Temperament
* Temperament or tampering with established tunings
* Timbre Harmonics, patches, and transforms.
* History of Musicians and Temperament
* Publishing technique (How to use your web host)


C04 Charter Implementation

See Moderation Policy and Practice.


C05 Changes to Moderation Policy

Proposals for changes to this document can pass with a two thirds
majority vote. All who approve this document should send it to
mailto:***@big-8.org. It is up to their quorom rationale to decide
whether sufficient approval has been met. Changes may also be
discussed in this thread or proposed in a pre-amble of your
submission to that board.


C07 (Most of Section Deleted under "If it goes without saying, then
let it go without saying.")

(Moderator Contact Addresses, first copy...EMPTY and OPEN)
Please nominate yourself to me or ***@googlegroups.com,
because I want to be able to do more than mechanical filtration.
You may do it in this thread.


C08 Readership Participation & Responsibility

All participants in news:rec.music.practice may:

* Request changes to moderation policy and participate in discussion
of changes.
* Privately ask for all moderators to review a specific rejected
post (within practical numerical limits determined by moderators.)
* Nominate new moderators.

MODERATION POLICY: rec.music.practice


MPP01 Purpose

rec.music.practice would be a moderated newsgroup that provides a
friendly, respectful forum for discussion of all aspects of
Mathematics, Phyics, and psycho-acoustics that are relevant to music.
rec.music.practice appeals to a wide range of people involved in both
recreational and professional aspects of establishing, maintaining,
propagating, and rendering musical repertoire. Participants range
from novices to people with many years of experience; from those with
a day job, to those whose day job involves music; from specialists to
solo producers; serial to orchestral; enjineers, scientists, and
artists. Sharing ideas, asking questions, or lurking are welcome from
all who want to learn.


MPP02 Automated (robotic) Moderation Software

Moderators should employ automated moderation software to initially
screen and pre-filter all incoming posts, and to ensure that all
posts meet certain current moderation policies. Posts that do not
will be automatically returned along with a brief explanation,
provided that such posts have a valid return address. All posts that
are approved by automated software will be forwarded to human
moderators for further examination.


MPP03 Cross-posting

Cross-posting to related groups based on subject matter
(e.g.,rec.music.*, alt.music.*, and groups related to lyrics in
links) will be allowed. No cross-posting to irrelevant groups will be
permitted. Such cross-posted messages shall be returned, provided a
valid return email address is provided.


MPP04 Authorship of Posts

Anyone will be allowed to post as long as they are not forging another
poster's name or address. Anonymous posting will be allowed.
Occasional name-shifting may be permitted, but excessive
name-shifting will not be permitted, as per C03.


MPP05 Human Moderation

After approval by any automated software, messages are forwarded for
review, based upon C02 & C03. Rejected messages shall be returned to
a poster, provided a valid return address is available. An
explanation for rejection shall be included, and it may be automated
in case of blocked senders.

Moderators do not add, delete, or edit anything within a post. Tags
are not added. With exceptions for bot-actuated rejection and
anonymous submission, a moderator randomly assigned will pass all
rejected articles back to a submitter, along with either guidance for
changes, or a reason for rejection of a subject. In rare cases,
individuals who persist in sending material that does not meet
content guidelines in this charter will be blocked from making
submissions to any moderator: Inclusion of an individual on a block
list requires consent of two thirds of moderators, and it may happen
without collusion.

Moderators permit posts that may contain technically incorrect
information, provided that the post is not deemed to be deliberately
deceptive. Any approved post that is forwarded to this newsgroup, and
contains incorrect information, may and should be followed up by
posts that attempt to correct the misinformation. Such corrective
posts may be made by any interested person/s in the newsgroup.

All personal posts made by moderators go through the same complete
process as posts made by the general readership of the group.
Moderators do not review their own posts, nor those of a relative.
Moderators who fail to abide by the charter and current moderation
policy may be warned or removed by other moderators; two thirds of a
majority.

Posting with a valid or mangled-and-decipherable (munged) e-mail
address enables accountability.


MPP06 Moderator Approval and Rejection Policies

Moderators may consult with one another before deciding to pass or
reject a post whose content is borderline or questionable. This
consultation may add to the time-delay of the processing of a post.

If a post is rejected, it may be appealed to the Moderation Team,
provided it is seen as a legitimate request, and not as a disruptive
attempt or tactic to distract or flood the team with large numbers of
obviously inappropriate messages.


MPP07 Personal Advertising

Very limited personal advertising shall be permitted. Such
advertising must be directly related to music marketing. The number
of ads permitted by any one poster per any given time period shall be
left to the discretion of the moderators, with all posters subject to
the same conditions. Links on the last line of a post (Loosely,
signatures) that otherwise follows in a thread do not count under
this policy.


MPP08 Ending Threads

Moderators reserve the right to end a thread that has veered
significantly off-topic, or that has become dominated by rehashing
and/or repetition.


MPP10 Structure of the Human Moderation Team

(ignore dates that I do not set)

The review and moderation of posts that are approved by the automated
software program will be conducted by a Moderation Team.

The first moderation team members will be divided into two classes,
and appointed for one or two year terms, to end on August 31, 2008
and 2009 respectively. Thereafter a new class of moderators will be
elected annually during the month of August, to serve two-year terms,
beginning on September 1st of the election year and continuing
through August 31st of the second year after the election. The
current moderation team will select each new class of moderators, and
election will be by a minimum 2/3 vote of the current moderators.

The total number of moderators may be changed by the moderation team,
which will seek to maintain an equal number of members in each class.
The general readership of rec.music.practice are encouraged to
propose/nominate potential moderators to the team, as per C08.

Moderators may be re-elected. The moderation team shall elect
persons to fill vacancies using the 2/3 criterion for election.


MPP11 Head Moderator

The moderation team may choose to elect a (head/chief/administrative)
moderator by a majority vote, if it deems such a position to be
necessary. The duties and responsibilities of such a position would
be determined as needed.


MPP12 Moderator Removal

If a moderator does not abide by the charter and current moderation
policies, the other moderators may warn and, if necessary, remove that
moderator by a 2/3 majority vote of the moderation team. Moderators
who wish to resign for any reason may do so by emailing all other
moderators.


MPP13 Changes to Moderation Policy & Practices

As stated in the Charter, moderation policy & practices (MPP) may be
changed to meet the permanent objectives of the Charter and the
ongoing needs of the newsgroup.

Proposed changes are announced by the moderators in the newsgroup,
and the general readership may discuss the proposed changes. Changes
shall be adopted by a 2/3 majority of the current moderators, and
will be published in the newsgroup.

As stated in C08, the general readership may suggest changes to
policy and practices.


MPP14 Moderator Posts

Moderators shall use [MODERATOR ANNOUNCE:] to preface official
informational posts to the readership of rec.music.practice.

MPP15 Moderator Contact Addresses

(APPLICATIONS CAN BE MADE IN THIS THREAD)

As per C07, moderators shall provide a contact email address for
anyone who wishes to make a complaint, question, or offer a
suggestion.

PROPONENT:
JWL <***@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca>


CHANGE HISTORY

1. Began as rec.ponds.moderated.
2. Changed purpose and examined content.
3. Minor operational and practical changes made mostly to integrate
sections on moderator conduct and make policy online with software
available.
4. Other aesthetic and readability changes made, for example I
deleted the paragraph that mentioned PGP, because the technology
(maintained service, really) to hide a pseudonym's ISP has existed
for a decade, and actually in The Onion Router, it has grown to
layers upon layers of indirection.
5. Removed a lot of superfluous definite articles.
JWL
2011-03-11 12:48:39 UTC
Permalink
If you hav or can satisfy requirements of this charter,
then please apply to me, ***@googlegroups.com, or
in this thread. This charter does not require you to know
anything about allowed topics. All you need to know
how to do is reject anything petty or off topic.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NPA for a definition
of personal attack.

NEWSGROUPS LINE:
rec.music.practice Care and enjoyment in music practice.
(Moderated)

RATIONALE:

rec.music.practice would be a moderated newsgroup that provides a
friendly, respectful forum for discussion of all aspects of
Mathematics, Phyics, and psycho-acoustics that are relevant to music.

CHARTER:

rec.music.practice appeals to a wide range of people people involved
in both recreational and professional aspects of establishing,
maintaining, propagating, and rendering musical repertoire.
Participants range from novices to people with many years of
experience; from those with a day job, to those whose day job
involves music; from specialists to solo producers; serial to
orchestral; enjineers, scientists, and artists. Sharing ideas, asking
questions, or lurking are welcome from all who want to learn.

ALLOWED TOPICS:

* Melody
* Harmony
* Counterpoint
* Baseline
* Dissonance
* Time Signatures
* Consonance (Archaically, Assonance)
* Chords, tablature, and numeric notation
* Just Intonation and Equal Temperament
* Temperament or tampering with established tunings
* Timbre Harmonics, patches, and transforms.
* History of Musicians and Temperament
* Publishing technique (How to use your web host)
* Other media for music theory
* Moderation Policy

PROHIBITED TOPICS

Posts containing these items will be rejected and returned if
feasible:

* Excessive cross-posting, although limited, on-topic cross-posting
is permitted
* Commercial or advertising posts, chain letters, or Excessive
Multiple
Posting
* Obscenities.
* Pseudonym shifting (sock puppetry): Open claims to being more
than one person is on topic in groups about psychiatry. Moderators
should be notified of marriages under one e-mail address with a
direct message.
* Implied or direct threats, slander, insults, bigotry, prejudice
or harassment, flaming, baiting, flooding, and personal attacks
* Unjustified criticism, especially unusable critiques.
* Attacks on others based on gender, race, sexual orientation
or religion
* Binaries other than pgp signatures, x-face headers, and other
ancillary article meta-data. Links are fine.
* Forgery of names, valid email addresses or approval headers
* Excessive quoting of old material, with little new content
* Personal identification information associated with anyone other
than yourself (e.g. residential addresses, phone numbers and
government identifications).
* Content advocating acts that would be intrinsically illegal
in most places
* Content illegal in the jurisdiction of moderators
* Copyright violations. (However, pointers to news articles,
blogs, etc. that are on-topic are welcome. They must comply with
fair use standards.)

MODERATION POLICY:

Moderators will employ software to initially screen and pre-filter all
incoming posts. Posts that clearly do not meet certain current
moderation policies will be automatically rejected and an attempt will
be made to return that post along with a brief explanation.

CROSS-POSTING:

Cross-posting to irrelevant groups will be disallowed.
Cross-posting to related groups based on subject matter
rec.music.*, alt.music.*, groups related to lyrics in links,
and groups related to sound synthesis will be allowed.

AUTHORSHIP OF POSTS:

Anyone will be allowed to post as long as they are not forging.
Anonymous posting will be allowed. Name shifting will not.

HUMAN MODERATION:

Moderators do not add, delete, or edit anything within a body
of a post. Tags are not added. Moderators will enforce this
Charter.

Moderators may permit posts that contain technically incorrect
information, provided that a post does not seem deliberately
deceptive.

All posts made by moderators go through the same complete
process as posts made by other readers of news:rec.music.practice.

MODERATOR APPROVAL AND REJECTION POLICY:

Moderators may consult with one another before deciding to pass or
reject a post whose content is borderline or questionable. This
consultation may add delay to processing a post. Rejections
may be appealed to moderators.

ENDING THREADS:

Moderators may end a thread that has veered significantly off-topic,
or that has become dominated by rehashing or repetition.

MODERATOR STRUCTURE:

Moderator membership should become staggered.
At least one should be elected each year, to serve a
two year term, beginning and ending on the first
anniversary of a control message creating news:rec.music.practice.

Lone moderators should not post on anything
but moderation policy. On any topic other than
policy, a lone moderator should e-mail users with
an invitation to post a reply.

Readers of rec.music.practice are encouraged
to nominate moderators, including themselves,
at any time.

Moderators may be re-elected. Moderators shall elect
people to fill vacancies with a minimum of two thirds
majority approval.

HEAD MODERATOR:

A minimum of two thirds of moderators may elect a chief
moderator if posters in news:rec.music.practice can define
a purpose for such a position.

MODERATOR REMOVAL:

If a moderator does not abide by this charter, then other moderators
may warn and, if necessary, remove that moderator by a minimum of
two thirds of other moderators.

To keep this charter up to date, moderators who wish to resign for any
reason may do so by emailing all other moderators and
***@googlegroups.com.

CHANGES TO MODERATION POLICY:

Moderation policy may be changed to meet charter purpose
and readership desires. A minimum of two thirds of a majority
of moderators may change policy, which will be published in
this charter and news:rec.music.practice.

MODERATOR POSTS:

Moderators shall use [MODERATOR ANNOUNCE:] to preface
policy changes to rec.music.practice.

MODERATOR CONTACT ADDRESSES:

[needs to be filled in]

PROPONENT:
JWL <***@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca>
Steve Bonine
2011-03-11 14:07:16 UTC
Permalink
. . . This charter does not require you to know
anything about allowed topics. All you need to know
how to do is reject anything petty or off topic.
If I know nothing about the allowed topics, how do I deduce what is off
topic? This is a serious question, based on experience moderating a
Usenet newsgroup when I did not know enough about the topic.
JWL
2011-03-11 16:43:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Bonine
. . . This charter does not require you to know
anything about allowed topics. All you need to know
how to do is reject anything petty or off topic.
If I know nothing about the allowed topics, how do I deduce what is
off topic? This is a serious question, based on experience
moderating a Usenet newsgroup when I did not know enough about the
topic.
It is like buying hiking boots. After you buy them, you hav to break
them in.
The most honourable posters will object to the rejection, or just
repeat the
submission in hopes of getting a more open moderator. When it comes to
music, I would hope that you become more open as you become more
knowledgeable.

If it is not offensive, then let it go.
If it actually was offensive, then someone haz to
explain what makes it offensive.
_______
http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/Sound/Mozart.mp3
"Moderation in war is imbecility." Admiral John Fisher
Mark Kramer
2011-03-14 21:40:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Bonine
If I know nothing about the allowed topics, how do I deduce what is off
topic? This is a serious question, based on experience moderating a
Usenet newsgroup when I did not know enough about the topic.
Would that be news.groups.proposals, where discussion of this "charter"
for rec.music.practice has been approved without any proposal to create
such a group on the table?
Steve Bonine
2011-03-14 21:46:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Kramer
Would that be news.groups.proposals, where discussion of this "charter"
for rec.music.practice has been approved without any proposal to create
such a group on the table?
Informal proposals are fine in news.groups.proposals. At some point I
hope to see a formal RFD, but that's not required to have a discussion
in news.groups.proposals.
rakman
2011-03-11 15:41:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by JWL
If you hav or can satisfy requirements of this charter,
in this thread. This charter does not require you to know
anything about allowed topics. All you need to know
how to do is reject anything petty or off topic.
Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NPAfor a definition
of personal attack.
rec.music.practice      Care and enjoyment in music practice.
(Moderated)
rec.music.practice would be a moderated newsgroup that provides a
friendly, respectful forum for discussion of all aspects of
Mathematics, Phyics, and psycho-acoustics that are relevant to music.
rec.music.practice appeals to a wide range of people people involved
in both recreational and professional aspects of establishing,
maintaining, propagating, and rendering musical repertoire.
Participants range from novices to people with many years of
experience; from those with a day job, to those whose day job
involves music; from specialists to solo producers; serial to
orchestral; enjineers, scientists, and artists. Sharing ideas, asking
questions, or lurking are welcome from all who want to learn.
 * Melody
 * Harmony
 * Counterpoint
 * Baseline
 * Dissonance
 * Time Signatures
 * Consonance (Archaically, Assonance)
 * Chords, tablature, and numeric notation
 * Just Intonation and Equal Temperament
 * Temperament or tampering with established tunings
 * Timbre Harmonics, patches, and transforms.
 * History of Musicians and Temperament
 * Publishing technique (How to use your web host)
 * Other media for music theory
 * Moderation Policy
PROHIBITED TOPICS
Posts containing these items will be rejected and returned if
 * Excessive cross-posting, although limited, on-topic cross-posting
    is permitted
 * Commercial or advertising posts, chain letters, or Excessive
Multiple
    Posting
 * Obscenities.
 * Pseudonym shifting (sock puppetry): Open claims to being more
    than one person is on topic in groups about psychiatry. Moderators
    should be notified of marriages under one e-mail address with a
    direct message.
 * Implied or direct threats, slander, insults, bigotry, prejudice
    or harassment, flaming, baiting, flooding, and personal attacks
 * Unjustified criticism, especially unusable critiques.
 * Attacks on others based on gender, race, sexual orientation
    or religion
 * Binaries other than pgp signatures, x-face headers, and other
    ancillary article meta-data. Links are fine.
 * Forgery of names, valid email addresses or approval headers
 * Excessive quoting of old material, with little new content
 * Personal identification information associated with anyone other
    than yourself (e.g.  residential addresses, phone numbers and
    government identifications).
 * Content advocating acts that would be intrinsically illegal
    in most places
 * Content illegal in the jurisdiction of moderators
 * Copyright violations.  (However, pointers to news articles,
    blogs, etc. that are on-topic are welcome.  They must comply with
    fair use standards.)
Moderators will employ software to initially screen and pre-filter all
incoming posts. Posts that clearly do not meet certain current
moderation policies will be automatically rejected and an attempt will
be made to return that post along with a brief explanation.
Cross-posting to irrelevant groups will be disallowed.
Cross-posting to related groups based on subject matter
rec.music.*, alt.music.*, groups related to lyrics in links,
and groups related to sound synthesis will be allowed.
Anyone will be allowed to post as long as they are not forging.
Anonymous posting will be allowed. Name shifting will not.
Moderators do not add, delete, or edit anything within a body
of a post. Tags are not added.  Moderators will enforce this
Charter.
Moderators may permit posts that contain technically incorrect
information, provided that a post does not seem deliberately
deceptive.
All posts made by moderators go through the same complete
process as posts made by other readers of news:rec.music.practice.
Moderators may consult with one another before deciding to pass or
reject a post whose content is borderline or questionable. This
consultation may add delay to processing a post. Rejections
may be appealed to moderators.
Moderators may end a thread that has veered significantly off-topic,
or that has become dominated by rehashing or repetition.
Moderator membership should become staggered.
At least one should be elected each year, to serve a
two year term, beginning and ending on the first
anniversary of a control message creating news:rec.music.practice.
Lone moderators should not post on anything
but moderation policy. On any topic other than
policy, a lone moderator should e-mail users with
an invitation to post a reply.
Readers of rec.music.practice are encouraged
to nominate moderators, including themselves,
at any time.
Moderators may be re-elected. Moderators shall elect
people to fill vacancies with a minimum of two thirds
majority approval.
A minimum of two thirds of moderators may elect a chief
moderator if posters in news:rec.music.practice can define
a purpose for such a position.
If a moderator does not abide by this charter, then other moderators
may warn and, if necessary, remove that moderator by a minimum of
two thirds of other moderators.
To keep this charter up to date, moderators who wish to resign for any
reason may do so by emailing all other moderators and
Moderation policy may be changed to meet charter purpose
and readership desires. A minimum of two thirds of a majority
of moderators may change policy, which will be published in
this charter and news:rec.music.practice.
Moderators shall use [MODERATOR ANNOUNCE:] to preface
policy changes to rec.music.practice.
[needs to be filled in]
lol. i was fantasizing about the ideal newsgroup, too.

sort of like a cross between the songwriting group, the jazz
guitar group, gearslutz, various dance music forums
like the dubstep one, the bass guitar group, twitter, youtube, blogs
and gossip websites, wikipedia..... with lots of trolling and
flame wars allowed too.
the trolls would have to go through a form of intelligence testing
over a period of time, to ensure that only entertaining and
reasonably intelligent trolling was allowed :)
and the word "beatles" would have to be blocked, forever.
rakman
2011-03-11 15:51:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by JWL
If you hav or can satisfy requirements of this charter,
in this thread. This charter does not require you to know
anything about allowed topics. All you need to know
how to do is reject anything petty or off topic.
Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NPAfor a definition
of personal attack.
rec.music.practice      Care and enjoyment in music practice.
(Moderated)
rec.music.practice would be a moderated newsgroup that provides a
friendly, respectful forum for discussion of all aspects of
Mathematics, Phyics, and psycho-acoustics that are relevant to music.
rec.music.practice appeals to a wide range of people people involved
in both recreational and professional aspects of establishing,
maintaining, propagating, and rendering musical repertoire.
Participants range from novices to people with many years of
experience; from those with a day job, to those whose day job
involves music; from specialists to solo producers; serial to
orchestral; enjineers, scientists, and artists. Sharing ideas, asking
questions, or lurking are welcome from all who want to learn.
 * Melody
 * Harmony
 * Counterpoint
 * Baseline
 * Dissonance
 * Time Signatures
 * Consonance (Archaically, Assonance)
 * Chords, tablature, and numeric notation
 * Just Intonation and Equal Temperament
 * Temperament or tampering with established tunings
 * Timbre Harmonics, patches, and transforms.
 * History of Musicians and Temperament
 * Publishing technique (How to use your web host)
 * Other media for music theory
 * Moderation Policy
PROHIBITED TOPICS
Posts containing these items will be rejected and returned if
 * Excessive cross-posting, although limited, on-topic cross-posting
    is permitted
 * Commercial or advertising posts, chain letters, or Excessive
Multiple
    Posting
 * Obscenities.
 * Pseudonym shifting (sock puppetry): Open claims to being more
    than one person is on topic in groups about psychiatry. Moderators
    should be notified of marriages under one e-mail address with a
    direct message.
 * Implied or direct threats, slander, insults, bigotry, prejudice
    or harassment, flaming, baiting, flooding, and personal attacks
 * Unjustified criticism, especially unusable critiques.
 * Attacks on others based on gender, race, sexual orientation
    or religion
 * Binaries other than pgp signatures, x-face headers, and other
    ancillary article meta-data. Links are fine.
 * Forgery of names, valid email addresses or approval headers
 * Excessive quoting of old material, with little new content
 * Personal identification information associated with anyone other
    than yourself (e.g.  residential addresses, phone numbers and
    government identifications).
 * Content advocating acts that would be intrinsically illegal
    in most places
 * Content illegal in the jurisdiction of moderators
 * Copyright violations.  (However, pointers to news articles,
    blogs, etc. that are on-topic are welcome.  They must comply with
    fair use standards.)
Moderators will employ software to initially screen and pre-filter all
incoming posts. Posts that clearly do not meet certain current
moderation policies will be automatically rejected and an attempt will
be made to return that post along with a brief explanation.
Cross-posting to irrelevant groups will be disallowed.
Cross-posting to related groups based on subject matter
rec.music.*, alt.music.*, groups related to lyrics in links,
and groups related to sound synthesis will be allowed.
Anyone will be allowed to post as long as they are not forging.
Anonymous posting will be allowed. Name shifting will not.
Moderators do not add, delete, or edit anything within a body
of a post. Tags are not added.  Moderators will enforce this
Charter.
Moderators may permit posts that contain technically incorrect
information, provided that a post does not seem deliberately
deceptive.
All posts made by moderators go through the same complete
process as posts made by other readers of news:rec.music.practice.
Moderators may consult with one another before deciding to pass or
reject a post whose content is borderline or questionable. This
consultation may add delay to processing a post. Rejections
may be appealed to moderators.
Moderators may end a thread that has veered significantly off-topic,
or that has become dominated by rehashing or repetition.
Moderator membership should become staggered.
At least one should be elected each year, to serve a
two year term, beginning and ending on the first
anniversary of a control message creating news:rec.music.practice.
Lone moderators should not post on anything
but moderation policy. On any topic other than
policy, a lone moderator should e-mail users with
an invitation to post a reply.
Readers of rec.music.practice are encouraged
to nominate moderators, including themselves,
at any time.
Moderators may be re-elected. Moderators shall elect
people to fill vacancies with a minimum of two thirds
majority approval.
A minimum of two thirds of moderators may elect a chief
moderator if posters in news:rec.music.practice can define
a purpose for such a position.
If a moderator does not abide by this charter, then other moderators
may warn and, if necessary, remove that moderator by a minimum of
two thirds of other moderators.
To keep this charter up to date, moderators who wish to resign for any
reason may do so by emailing all other moderators and
Moderation policy may be changed to meet charter purpose
and readership desires. A minimum of two thirds of a majority
of moderators may change policy, which will be published in
this charter and news:rec.music.practice.
Moderators shall use [MODERATOR ANNOUNCE:] to preface
policy changes to rec.music.practice.
[needs to be filled in]
how about a career in law-making, instead?
Kathy Morgan
2011-03-12 07:29:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by JWL
If you hav or can satisfy requirements of this charter,
in this thread.
Please do *not* apply to ***@googlegroups.com. You may apply to the
OP, JWL <***@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca>, or volunteer in this thread,
but the B8MB is not going to mediate applications to be moderator.
--
Kathy, Member of B8MB
J.B. Wood
2011-03-14 10:41:42 UTC
Permalink
Hello, and while moderated newsgroups have their place, I generally
favor unmoderated ones. I just view spammers and OT posters (myself
included on occasion) as the price one pays for this freedom. Killfiles
can really clean things up on the viewing end. I don't appreciate the
delays that one can encounter when getting a post on a moderated group.
I also don't like to be subject to the vagaries of the moderator.
After all these years I intend to stay with r.m.t unless it devolves
into 100% spam. (Hey, do any of us old timers miss Al Silverman?)
Sincerely,
--
J. B. Wood e-mail: ***@hotmail.com
Joey Goldstein
2011-03-14 17:36:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by J.B. Wood
Hello, and while moderated newsgroups have their place, I generally
favor unmoderated ones. I just view spammers and OT posters (myself
included on occasion) as the price one pays for this freedom. Killfiles
can really clean things up on the viewing end. I don't appreciate the
delays that one can encounter when getting a post on a moderated group.
I also don't like to be subject to the vagaries of the moderator.
+1
Post by J.B. Wood
After
all these years I intend to stay with r.m.t unless it devolves into 100%
spam. (Hey, do any of us old timers miss Al Silverman?) Sincerely,
lol
--
Joey Goldstein
<http://www.joeygoldstein.com>
<http://homepage.mac.com/josephgoldstein/AudioClips/audio.htm>
joegold AT primus DOT ca
Gill Smith
2011-03-14 19:47:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by J.B. Wood
I also don't like to be subject to the vagaries of the moderator.
me neither

--
http://www.gillsmith999.plus.com/
LJS
2011-03-14 22:21:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by J.B. Wood
Hello, and while moderated newsgroups have their place, I generally
favor unmoderated ones.  I just view spammers and OT posters (myself
included on occasion) as the price one pays for this freedom.  Killfiles
can really clean things up on the viewing end.   I don't appreciate the
delays that one can encounter when getting a post on a moderated group.
  I also don't like to be subject to the vagaries of the moderator.
After all these years I intend to stay with r.m.t unless it devolves
into 100% spam.  (Hey, do any of us old timers miss Al Silverman?)
Sincerely,
--
I have a delete key. It works fine. This current problem is part of
life and I don't need anyone filtering members for me. I can do that
or not as I choose.

The last moderated group I have ever used it to promote his own
products and moderated everyone that disagreed with it out of the
group. Maybe its my birthplace but I still like FREE discussion, even
if you have to delete out the crap.

Thanks anyway.

LJS
Eric Boon
2011-03-14 22:53:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by LJS
Maybe its my birthplace but I still like FREE discussion,
I guess you're not from the USA, then, eh? ;-)
paramucho
2011-03-15 04:20:31 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 06:41:42 -0400, "J.B. Wood"
Post by J.B. Wood
Hello, and while moderated newsgroups have their place, I generally
favor unmoderated ones. I just view spammers and OT posters (myself
included on occasion) as the price one pays for this freedom. Killfiles
can really clean things up on the viewing end. I don't appreciate the
delays that one can encounter when getting a post on a moderated group.
I also don't like to be subject to the vagaries of the moderator.
After all these years I intend to stay with r.m.t unless it devolves
into 100% spam.
I've posted to moderated groups for many years. There has been the odd
disagreement with the moderators, but they've been rare. On the whole,
moderators do a rather tedious, unpaid job for which they receive not
a lot in the way of thanks. The idea that they are meglamaniacs ruling
the known universe is *usually* an accusation levelled by real
meglamaniacs who want to rule the known universe through the medium of
their QWERTY superpowers.

On the plus side, some of the most interesting threads I've been
involved in have been in the moderated group, simply because the
thread *did* stay on topic and did stay polite, in a stiff-upper-lip
kind-of-way.

Another advantage of the moderated group was that there was much less
traffic. So, it was not unusual for members to post worked-out
articles to the group, knowing that their effort was not going to be
buried some 10 milliseconds later by someone screaming wildly about
all the evil coming out of the walls that surrounded them.

Moderated groups don't kill off unmoderated groups. And, in my
experience, posters sometimes moved a thread from the moderated group
to the unmoderated group to get faster and unfettered transmission.
One could be a gentleman one minute and a street fighter the next...

Thus, I think having a choice between RMT and RMP would provide a
wider spectrum of choice and opportunity, and a possibility of
synergy.
Post by J.B. Wood
After all these years I intend to stay with r.m.t unless it devolves
into 100% spam.
Perhaps you have killfiles on--the past few weeks or so it has come
very close to that figure. The regular traffic is certainly fairly low
at the moment. I've found less of interest over the last year or so
(although I've been a bit distracted by other things as well).

In any case, it isn't a matter of one or the other. We can have both.
Post by J.B. Wood
(Hey, do any of us old timers miss Al Silverman?)
Not particularly (and I hope he's well). But I do miss Matt.

Ian
Steve Bonine
2011-03-15 05:17:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by paramucho
I've posted to moderated groups for many years. There has been the odd
disagreement with the moderators, but they've been rare. On the whole,
moderators do a rather tedious, unpaid job for which they receive not
a lot in the way of thanks. The idea that they are meglamaniacs ruling
the known universe is *usually* an accusation levelled by real
meglamaniacs who want to rule the known universe through the medium of
their QWERTY superpowers.
The moderators of Usenet offer their thanks for the kind words . . .
even the megalomaniac ones.
Post by paramucho
On the plus side, some of the most interesting threads I've been
involved in have been in the moderated group, simply because the
thread *did* stay on topic and did stay polite, in a stiff-upper-lip
kind-of-way.
There are advantages and disadvantages of both moderated and unmoderated
newsgroups. The best option is to have a choice.
Post by paramucho
Another advantage of the moderated group was that there was much less
traffic. So, it was not unusual for members to post worked-out
articles to the group, knowing that their effort was not going to be
buried some 10 milliseconds later by someone screaming wildly about
all the evil coming out of the walls that surrounded them.
There is no doubt that the signal-to-noise ratio on moderated newsgroups
tends to be higher. But the price you pay for that is having someone
else select articles for you. Some people think that's a reasonable
trade off; some think it's the kiss of death. That's why choice is good.

Reducing noise through moderation is only half of the solution. If
there are no submissions, the signal-to-noise ratio is zero which is not
an improvement.
Post by paramucho
Moderated groups don't kill off unmoderated groups. And, in my
experience, posters sometimes moved a thread from the moderated group
to the unmoderated group to get faster and unfettered transmission.
One could be a gentleman one minute and a street fighter the next...
I am not a musician. But I see no reason to be a street fighter on a
newsgroup devoted to music-related topics. It is imminently possible to
disagree without indulging in personal attacks.

It is occasionally an interesting study to observe the difference in how
the same thread develops in an unmoderated newsgroup and a companion
moderated newsgroup.
Post by paramucho
Thus, I think having a choice between RMT and RMP would provide a
wider spectrum of choice and opportunity, and a possibility of
synergy.
Maybe. It depends on whether enough people are interested in
participating in the moderated newsgroup. If the current participants
are already coping with the noise by ignoring it (perhaps with the help
of killfiles) then there seems little motivation for a moderated
companion newsgroup.
Post by paramucho
Post by J.B. Wood
After all these years I intend to stay with r.m.t unless it devolves
into 100% spam.
Perhaps you have killfiles on--the past few weeks or so it has come
very close to that figure. The regular traffic is certainly fairly low
at the moment. I've found less of interest over the last year or so
(although I've been a bit distracted by other things as well).
I can think of a couple of reasons that a moderated newsgroup might
thrive. It might draw participation from several existing newsgroups
from people who are fed up with the current low signal-to-noise ratio.
It might motivate some old timers to return and/or current participants
to contribute more.

On the other hand, if the topic breadth of the new moderated group is
narrow, there is unlikely to be sufficient participation to maintain a
viable discussion.
Post by paramucho
In any case, it isn't a matter of one or the other. We can have both.
Yes, but a few things are needed. Perhaps first is a coherent RFD.

The big-8 board must approve the new newsgroup, and they will look for
enough support to give the proposed group a reasonable chance of
success. So far I count only two supporters.

Another requirement is a moderation team and a moderation platform.
paramucho
2011-03-15 10:54:04 UTC
Permalink
<snip>
Post by Steve Bonine
I can think of a couple of reasons that a moderated newsgroup might
thrive. It might draw participation from several existing newsgroups
from people who are fed up with the current low signal-to-noise ratio.
It might motivate some old timers to return and/or current participants
to contribute more.
On the other hand, if the topic breadth of the new moderated group is
narrow, there is unlikely to be sufficient participation to maintain a
viable discussion.
The announcements so far, that I've seen, have been contradictory. One
seems to suggest a mathematical/temperament focus while another points
to a completely general approach. I would imagine that only the latter
has any chance of survival.
Post by Steve Bonine
Post by paramucho
In any case, it isn't a matter of one or the other. We can have both.
Yes, but a few things are needed. Perhaps first is a coherent RFD.
That is a solvable problem.
Post by Steve Bonine
The big-8 board must approve the new newsgroup, and they will look for
enough support to give the proposed group a reasonable chance of
success. So far I count only two supporters.
That is probably an unsolvable problem.
<snip>

Ian
Brian Martin
2011-03-15 12:46:21 UTC
Permalink
Nothing (apart from Bohgosity) has ever stirred up this much debate before !
Kathy Morgan
2011-03-16 06:12:22 UTC
Permalink
[Note large number of groups; I don't know which one Brian Martin is
reading and responding from.]
Post by Brian Martin
Nothing (apart from Bohgosity) has ever stirred up this much debate before !
Can you give a brief synopsis of the debate regarding Bohgosity? It
matters, because Bohgosity is a handle for JWL, who is putting forth
this proposed charter.
--
Kathy, speaking just for myself
LJS
2011-03-16 10:55:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kathy Morgan
[Note large number of groups; I don't know which one Brian Martin is
reading and responding from.]
Post by Brian Martin
Nothing (apart from Bohgosity) has ever stirred up this much debate before !
Can you give a brief synopsis of the debate regarding Bohgosity?  It
matters, because Bohgosity is a handle for JWL, who is putting forth
this proposed charter.
--
Kathy, speaking just for myself
I don't know, but this is turning out to be as much of a distraction
as the Child Porn SPam that we have been having. Lots of deletes to
maintain in order to find a music theory post. Havn't we suffered
enough?

LJS
Brian Martin
2011-03-16 22:14:20 UTC
Permalink
Bohgosity posts frequent variations of composition exercises in harmony,
expressed as program source in Basic which appears to generate audio
output as a WAV file or similar by additive synthesis of sine waves.

To me they seem repetitious and of no interest either programmatically
or musically.

If others find them useful or interesting, than that's ok,
maybe I'm missing the point of his posts.
Post by Kathy Morgan
Can you give a brief synopsis of the debate regarding Bohgosity? It
matters, because Bohgosity is a handle for JWL, who is putting forth
this proposed charter.
Joey Goldstein
2011-03-17 05:00:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Martin
Bohgosity posts frequent variations of composition exercises in harmony,
expressed as program source in Basic which appears to generate audio
output as a WAV file or similar by additive synthesis of sine waves.
To me they seem repetitious and of no interest either programmatically
or musically.
+1
Post by Brian Martin
If others find them useful or interesting, than that's ok,
maybe I'm missing the point of his posts.
Can you give a brief synopsis of the debate regarding Bohgosity? It
matters, because Bohgosity is a handle for JWL, who is putting forth
this proposed charter.
--
Joey Goldstein
<http://www.joeygoldstein.com>
<http://homepage.mac.com/josephgoldstein/AudioClips/audio.htm>
joegold AT primus DOT ca
Kathy Morgan
2011-03-17 06:34:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Martin
Bohgosity posts frequent variations of composition exercises in harmony,
expressed as program source in Basic which appears to generate audio
output as a WAV file or similar by additive synthesis of sine waves.
To me they seem repetitious and of no interest either programmatically
or musically.
If others find them useful or interesting, than that's ok,
maybe I'm missing the point of his posts.
Okay, thanks.
--
Kathy
JWL
2011-03-18 16:02:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Martin
Bohgosity posts frequent variations of composition exercises in
harmony, expressed as program source in Basic which appears to
generate audio output as a WAV file or similar by additive synthesis
of sine waves.
To me they seem repetitious and of no interest either
programmatically
or musically.
If others find them useful or interesting, than that's ok,
maybe I'm missing the point of his posts.
Post by Kathy Morgan
Can you give a brief synopsis of the debate regarding Bohgosity?
It
matters, because Bohgosity is a handle for JWL, who is putting forth
this proposed charter.
Strangely enough, I would let that through if it were about me.
If it were about someone else's work, then I would want to know how
familiar she was with the concept of creative reading.
_______
A major semitone is a septimal fifteen to fourteen.
No publicity is bad publicity.
JWL
2011-03-18 08:34:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by paramucho
<snip>
Post by Steve Bonine
I can think of a couple of reasons that a moderated newsgroup might
thrive. It might draw participation from several existing
newsgroups
from people who are fed up with the current low signal-to-noise
ratio. It might motivate some old timers to return and/or current
participants to contribute more.
On the other hand, if the topic breadth of the new moderated group is
narrow, there is unlikely to be sufficient participation to
maintain
a viable discussion.
The announcements so far, that I've seen, have been contradictory. One
seems to suggest a mathematical/temperament focus while another points
to a completely general approach. I would imagine that only the latter
has any chance of survival.
Allowed topics are necessarily incomplete.
I wrote about what I am interested in, and tried to include other
threads I
hav watched, even though they were only vaguely about music.
In one sense, it is a fine art.
You could spoil something with a sloppy ending.
On the other, even if you do not really know what you are doing,
you could write something splendid.

Please let me know if you can write another line into allowed topics.

Like I told Mister Bonine, if it is not offensive, then let it go.
It is enough to know that anyone is trying to understand, and
if a thread becomes about a poster, then either it ends, or it
branches
off items in a thread that were about music.
_______
Complete abstinence is easier than perfect moderation.
- --Saint Augustine
Post by paramucho
Post by Steve Bonine
Post by paramucho
In any case, it isn't a matter of one or the other. We can have both.
Yes, but a few things are needed. Perhaps first is a coherent RFD.
That is a solvable problem.
Post by Steve Bonine
The big-8 board must approve the new newsgroup, and they will look
for enough support to give the proposed group a reasonable chance
of
success. So far I count only two supporters.
I am still hoping for an applicant.
I would like the freedom to close my e-mail client or ignore bells,
like I did in much of this last week to work on re-casting a tune.
Post by paramucho
That is probably an unsolvable problem.
<snip>
Ian
_______
http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/Sound/
JWL
2011-03-18 16:18:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by JWL
Like I told Mister Bonine, if it is not offensive, then let it go.
If you're planning to use this philosophy in moderating the
newsgroup,
the charter can consist of one line: "Any submission that's not
offensive will be approved." That will save you a lot of effort in
polishing the charter.
I could do that, theoretically, except it would not tell people what
is *most* welcome, so that if you step out of line, or your subthread
steps out of line,
say if I put the machine on auto-pilot (or I missed the bait), then I
would hav
no boxes in the sand, into which you should step.
_______
Do Cheshire cats drink evaporated milk?
LJS
2011-03-19 04:34:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by JWL
Post by JWL
Like I told Mister Bonine, if it is not offensive, then let it go.
If you're planning to use this philosophy in moderating the
newsgroup,
the charter can consist of one line:  "Any submission that's not
offensive will be approved."  That will save you a lot of effort in
polishing the charter.
I could do that, theoretically, except it would not tell people what
is *most* welcome, so that if you step out of line, or your subthread
steps out of line,
say if  I put the machine on auto-pilot (or I missed the bait), then I
would hav
no boxes in the sand, into which you should step.
_______
Do Cheshire cats drink evaporated milk?
yo, if you want to start a group, please GO ahead. The key word is GO!
This drivil might not be as offensive as the kiddie porn/sex perverts/
self acclaimed musican and his diatribe, but just as that werido, all
this has nothing to do with music.

He is the self proclaimed God oaf music and you are the self
proclaimed savior of music theory groups. Start it, post the address
once and go away. Havn't we suffered enough?

LJS
JWL
2011-03-20 06:02:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by LJS
Post by JWL
Post by JWL
Like I told Mister Bonine, if it is not offensive, then let it go.
If you're planning to use this philosophy in moderating the
newsgroup,
the charter can consist of one line: "Any submission that's not
offensive will be approved." That will save you a lot of effort in
polishing the charter.
I could do that, theoretically, except it would not tell people what
is *most* welcome, so that if you step out of line, or your
subthread
steps out of line,
say if I put the machine on auto-pilot (or I missed the bait), then
I
would hav
no boxes in the sand, into which you should step.
_______
Do Cheshire cats drink evaporated milk?
yo, if you want to start a group, please GO ahead. The key word is GO!
This drivil might not be as offensive as the kiddie porn/sex
perverts/
self acclaimed musican and his diatribe, but just as that werido, all
this has nothing to do with music.
He is the self proclaimed God oaf music and you are the self
proclaimed savior of music theory groups. Start it, post the address
once and go away. Havn't we suffered enough?
I only wish it were that simple.
Going away is not my plan. If I find myself as a lone moderator,
then I might be inclined to reply to someone's post in R.M.T, with
the followup headers set to both. That way, I announce the existence
of R.M.P, and I remind a few people that I am a lone moderator,
who is not inclined to trust his own judgement on whether a post
includes anything like a personal attack. I know that someone is
not happy with only two *public* supporters. The board also seems
to want more than one moderator. I am getting that from a moderator
who plans to reject my RFD.
Post by LJS
LJS
_______
Patience is a minor form of despair, disguised as virtue.
-- Ambrose Bierce, on qualifiers
Joey Goldstein
2011-03-20 07:06:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by JWL
Going away is not my plan.
Please reconsider.
--
Joey Goldstein
<http://www.joeygoldstein.com>
<http://homepage.mac.com/josephgoldstein/AudioClips/audio.htm>
joegold AT primus DOT ca
LJS
2011-03-20 14:06:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by JWL
Post by LJS
Post by JWL
Post by JWL
Like I told Mister Bonine, if it is not offensive, then let it go.
If you're planning to use this philosophy in moderating the
newsgroup,
the charter can consist of one line: "Any submission that's not
offensive will be approved." That will save you a lot of effort in
polishing the charter.
I could do that, theoretically, except it would not tell people what
is *most* welcome, so that if you step out of line, or your
subthread
steps out of line,
say if I put the machine on auto-pilot (or I missed the bait), then
I
would hav
no boxes in the sand, into which you should step.
_______
Do Cheshire cats drink evaporated milk?
yo, if you want to start a group, please GO ahead. The key word is GO!
This drivil might not be as offensive as the kiddie porn/sex
perverts/
self acclaimed musican and his diatribe, but just as that werido, all
this has nothing to do with music.
He is the self proclaimed God oaf music and you are the self
proclaimed savior of music theory groups. Start it, post the address
once and go away. Havn't we suffered enough?
I only wish it were that simple.
Going away is not my plan. If I find myself as a lone moderator,
then I might be inclined to reply to someone's post in R.M.T, with
the followup headers set to both. That way, I announce the existence
of R.M.P, and I remind a few people that I am a lone moderator,
who is not inclined to trust his own judgement on whether a post
includes anything like a personal attack. I know that someone is
not happy with only two *public* supporters. The board also seems
to want more than one moderator. I am getting that from a moderator
who plans to reject my RFD.
Post by LJS
LJS
_______
Patience is a minor form of despair, disguised as virtue.
-- Ambrose Bierce, on qualifiers- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
So what is your motivation? Don't you have a delete key something to
filter out the porn? Of course its a nuisance. But it is not the only
nusiance. I just click on Weary O's and the ads once and then refresh.
Voila, they are gone! Takes about 30 sec or less on a busy day.

There seems to have been as many moderator posts as ads and Weary
lately. What do you expect to get out of it?

If you want attention, you could either study music theory or find a
group that is more suitable to what you are interested in doing.
Just a thought.

LJS
Brian Martin
2011-03-21 11:26:06 UTC
Permalink
Enough already, this is exactly the kind of crap that I would expect a
moderator to reject.
This discussion is off topic & has nothing to do with music or synthesis.
Post by LJS
Post by JWL
Post by LJS
Post by JWL
Post by JWL
Like I told Mister Bonine, if it is not offensive, then let it go.
If you're planning to use this philosophy in moderating the
newsgroup,
the charter can consist of one line: "Any submission that's not
offensive will be approved." That will save you a lot of effort in
polishing the charter.
I could do that, theoretically, except it would not tell people what
is *most* welcome, so that if you step out of line, or your
subthread
steps out of line,
say if I put the machine on auto-pilot (or I missed the bait), then
I
would hav
no boxes in the sand, into which you should step.
_______
Do Cheshire cats drink evaporated milk?
yo, if you want to start a group, please GO ahead. The key word is GO!
This drivil might not be as offensive as the kiddie porn/sex
perverts/
self acclaimed musican and his diatribe, but just as that werido, all
this has nothing to do with music.
He is the self proclaimed God oaf music and you are the self
proclaimed savior of music theory groups. Start it, post the address
once and go away. Havn't we suffered enough?
I only wish it were that simple.
Going away is not my plan. If I find myself as a lone moderator,
then I might be inclined to reply to someone's post in R.M.T, with
the followup headers set to both. That way, I announce the existence
of R.M.P, and I remind a few people that I am a lone moderator,
who is not inclined to trust his own judgement on whether a post
includes anything like a personal attack. I know that someone is
not happy with only two *public* supporters. The board also seems
to want more than one moderator. I am getting that from a moderator
who plans to reject my RFD.
Post by LJS
LJS
_______
Patience is a minor form of despair, disguised as virtue.
-- Ambrose Bierce, on qualifiers- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
So what is your motivation? Don't you have a delete key something to
filter out the porn? Of course its a nuisance. But it is not the only
nusiance. I just click on Weary O's and the ads once and then refresh.
Voila, they are gone! Takes about 30 sec or less on a busy day.
There seems to have been as many moderator posts as ads and Weary
lately. What do you expect to get out of it?
If you want attention, you could either study music theory or find a
group that is more suitable to what you are interested in doing.
Just a thought.
LJS
Bohgosity BumaskiL
2011-05-03 04:56:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Martin
Enough already, this is exactly the kind of crap that I would expect a
moderator to reject.
This discussion is off topic & has nothing to do with music or
synthesis.
Yah. Yah. Yah. And it's like a blip on your screen if you get your
news from google, which, being free of everything but spam, is my
biggest source of motivation for the proposal.
Post by Brian Martin
Post by LJS
Post by JWL
Post by LJS
Post by JWL
Post by JWL
Like I told Mister Bonine, if it is not offensive, then let it go.
If you're planning to use this philosophy in moderating the
newsgroup,
the charter can consist of one line: "Any submission that's not
offensive will be approved." That will save you a lot of effort
in polishing the charter.
I could do that, theoretically, except it would not tell people what
is *most* welcome, so that if you step out of line, or your subthread
steps out of line,
say if I put the machine on auto-pilot (or I missed the bait),
then I
would hav
no boxes in the sand, into which you should step.
_______
Do Cheshire cats drink evaporated milk?
yo, if you want to start a group, please GO ahead. The key word
is
GO!
This drivil might not be as offensive as the kiddie porn/sex perverts/
self acclaimed musican and his diatribe, but just as that werido, all
this has nothing to do with music.
He is the self proclaimed God oaf music and you are the self
proclaimed savior of music theory groups. Start it, post the
address once and go away. Havn't we suffered enough?
I only wish it were that simple.
Going away is not my plan. If I find myself as a lone moderator,
then I might be inclined to reply to someone's post in R.M.T, with
the followup headers set to both. That way, I announce the
existence
of R.M.P, and I remind a few people that I am a lone moderator,
who is not inclined to trust his own judgement on whether a post
includes anything like a personal attack. I know that someone is
not happy with only two *public* supporters. The board also seems
to want more than one moderator. I am getting that from a
moderator
who plans to reject my RFD.
Post by LJS
LJS
_______
Patience is a minor form of despair, disguised as virtue.
-- Ambrose Bierce, on qualifiers- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
So what is your motivation? Don't you have a delete key something to
filter out the porn?
I hav something better than that. My news server subscribes to nocem
(no see em), which covers the majority of what comes through google. I
want the same for everybody, because when I write -NC- on one of my
compozitions, releasing music on USENET, it is almost pointless,
because on USENET, I am tacitly promoting rolex-knockoffs,
nike-sweatshops, and porn. Even though it doesn't appear on my server,
I can see it at google.
Post by Brian Martin
Post by LJS
Of course its a nuisance. But it is not the only
nusiance. I just click on Weary O's and the ads once and then
refresh. Voila, they are gone! Takes about 30 sec or less on a busy
day.
When I use thunderbird, and I don't happen to be...force of habit, the
filters for ill-wereo don't take a second. And what happens to people
who can't be bothered to learn the trick of "mark as read" all posts
from ..., and don't display read posts? There's a learning curve, and
outlook users outnumber thunderbird users, last time I checked, so
most people don't even hav twit filters. Chalk up fifty points for
free-porn.com

And all it takes is one newbie doing his "plonk" routine to bypass the
filters and remind me that the trolls and the spam are still there.
Post by Brian Martin
Post by LJS
There seems to have been as many moderator posts as ads and Weary
lately. What do you expect to get out of it?
More readership. rec.ponds.moderated gets about three times the
postings as the uinmoderated group, and there are probably a hundred
lurkers for every poster. I wouldn't be even remotely associated with
hideous things. Il Wereo is the least of my problems: At least he is
not posting pictures of it. Of course, I still don't want him getting
through.
Post by Brian Martin
Post by LJS
If you want attention, you could either study music theory or find a
group that is more suitable to what you are interested in doing.
Just a thought.
LJS
For the most part, at this stage in my game and in this weather, I am
not geared for doing *anything* on the internet: I am geared for
personal prezentations. My formal RFD can wait until November, when I
will hav time to go through the trouble of making this work -- and
that is if I am *not* into about three caroling scenes. I should
probably scout around for mailing list operators, too.
Brian Martin
2011-05-03 13:27:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
Post by Brian Martin
Enough already, this is exactly the kind of crap that I would expect a
moderator to reject.
This discussion is off topic& has nothing to do with music or
synthesis.
Yah. Yah. Yah. And it's like a blip on your screen if you get your
news from google, which, being free of everything but spam, is my
biggest source of motivation for the proposal.
OK, enough already. Enfin, j'en ai suffis.

1. The only reason I ever subscribed to this newsgroup was to test that
my NNTP access was working.
I chose this topic because I naively thought it might involve useful
information about music & synthesizers, which is an interest outside of
work.

2. I discovered that my NNTP access is working,
but that most of the topic contents are utter crap,
the music topics are full of Bohgosity, and the AI topics are full of
Arthur Mentifex, many other topics are just plain porn.

It's all a massive waste of electrons & a pointless burning of coal &
increase to global warming.

People like Bohgosity & Mentifex are the reason that NNTP is gradually
vanishing and that ISP's no longer see any commercial reason to run NNTP
servers.

These newsgroups make Facebook look like the pinnacle of intellectual
discourse.
Jethro Van Thuyne
2011-05-03 19:09:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Martin
Post by Brian Martin
This discussion is off topic& has nothing to do with music or
synthesis.
Yah. Yah. Yah. And it's like a blip on your screen if you get your news
from google, which, being free of everything but spam, is my biggest
source of motivation for the proposal.
It's all a massive waste of electrons & a pointless burning of coal &
increase to global warming.
Hi Brian,

I once increased global warming just a bit by microwaving a small piece
of anthracite coal with the door accidentally left open. It was quite the
evening.

Kindest wishes,

Jethro.
Bohgosity BumaskiL
2011-05-20 02:23:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Bonine
Post by paramucho
I've posted to moderated groups for many years. There has been the
odd disagreement with the moderators, but they've been rare. On the
whole, moderators do a rather tedious, unpaid job for which they
receive not a lot in the way of thanks. The idea that they are
meglamaniacs ruling the known universe is *usually* an accusation
levelled by real meglamaniacs who want to rule the known universe
through the medium of their QWERTY superpowers.
The moderators of Usenet offer their thanks for the kind words . . .
even the megalomaniac ones.
Post by paramucho
On the plus side, some of the most interesting threads I've been
involved in have been in the moderated group, simply because the
thread *did* stay on topic and did stay polite, in a
stiff-upper-lip
kind-of-way.
There are advantages and disadvantages of both moderated and
unmoderated newsgroups. The best option is to have a choice.
Post by paramucho
Another advantage of the moderated group was that there was much less
traffic. So, it was not unusual for members to post worked-out
articles to the group, knowing that their effort was not going to be
buried some 10 milliseconds later by someone screaming wildly about
all the evil coming out of the walls that surrounded them.
There is no doubt that the signal-to-noise ratio on moderated
newsgroups tends to be higher. But the price you pay for that is
having someone else select articles for you. Some people think
that's a reasonable trade off; some think it's the kiss of death.
That's why choice is good.
Reducing noise through moderation is only half of the solution. If
there are no submissions, the signal-to-noise ratio is zero which is
not an improvement.
Post by paramucho
Moderated groups don't kill off unmoderated groups. And, in my
experience, posters sometimes moved a thread from the moderated group
to the unmoderated group to get faster and unfettered transmission.
One could be a gentleman one minute and a street fighter the
next...
I am not a musician. But I see no reason to be a street fighter on a
newsgroup devoted to music-related topics. It is imminently
possible
to disagree without indulging in personal attacks.
I think so, too, and really, only two problem posters are in r.m.t.
One is a poser, or an all-time-highest-volume contributor,
pseudo-intellectual troll, who will write of things he knows nothing
about and pretty much shift hiz opinion to attack anybody he feels
like attacking, evidence or not, no holds barred. It's peculiar how
hiz language seems civil on the surface, while there really must be a
sad composer-wanna-be behind hiz initials. The other troll attacks
himself in the most profane way, using about ten pseudonyms. Hiz total
volume (nym adjusted) probably exceeds the poser. I do not care to get
music out of the poser or censure the profane one (who might actually
write music), anymore. I grew tired of it. When you wrestle with pigs,
you get dirty.

I won't say that it's impossible for that poser to make a valuable
contribution.
I will say that I do not expect it; no musical output.

There is a third guy who I find annoying, sometimes, and I see no
solid reason why I should be able to defeat him with anything but
examples, some of which might involve changes to hiz code.
Post by Steve Bonine
It is occasionally an interesting study to observe the difference in
how the same thread develops in an unmoderated newsgroup and a
companion moderated newsgroup.
Post by paramucho
Thus, I think having a choice between RMT and RMP would provide a
wider spectrum of choice and opportunity, and a possibility of
synergy.
Maybe. It depends on whether enough people are interested in
participating in the moderated newsgroup. If the current
participants
are already coping with the noise by ignoring it (perhaps with the
help of killfiles) then there seems little motivation for a
moderated
companion newsgroup.
Post by paramucho
Post by J.B. Wood
After all these years I intend to stay with r.m.t unless it
devolves
into 100% spam.
Perhaps you have killfiles on--the past few weeks or so it has come
very close to that figure. The regular traffic is certainly fairly
low at the moment. I've found less of interest over the last year
or
so (although I've been a bit distracted by other things as well).
I can think of a couple of reasons that a moderated newsgroup might
thrive. It might draw participation from several existing
newsgroups
from people who are fed up with the current low signal-to-noise ratio.
It might motivate some old timers to return and/or current
participants to contribute more.
On the other hand, if the topic breadth of the new moderated group is
narrow, there is unlikely to be sufficient participation to maintain a
viable discussion.
Post by paramucho
In any case, it isn't a matter of one or the other. We can have both.
Yes, but a few things are needed. Perhaps first is a coherent RFD.
The big-8 board must approve the new newsgroup, and they will look for
enough support to give the proposed group a reasonable chance of
success. So far I count only two supporters.
Another requirement is a moderation team and a moderation platform.
rec.ponds.moderated is doing fine with one moderator.
Steve Bonine
2011-05-20 13:51:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
only two problem posters are in r.m.t.
So ignore them and get on with your life.
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
Post by Steve Bonine
Another requirement is a moderation team and a moderation platform.
rec.ponds.moderated is doing fine with one moderator.
Until that person goes away.
Paul W. Schleck
2011-05-22 14:04:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Bonine
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
only two problem posters are in r.m.t.
So ignore them and get on with your life.
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
Post by Steve Bonine
Another requirement is a moderation team and a moderation platform.
rec.ponds.moderated is doing fine with one moderator.
Until that person goes away.
It is interesting to see how false memes develop in Usenet article
threads. One person makes a false assertion, and others assume that it
is true just because someone asserted it, and continue propagating the
false meme because they are more focused on arguing with that person
versus checking the assertion against easily available primary sources
(Just sayin'...).

Anyway, I've worked closely with the rec.ponds.moderated moderation team
over the past couple of years, so I dropped them a line to their
administrative contact address that is published in the headers of their
approved articles. They confirmed that their newsgroup continues to be
actively moderated by a team of multiple moderators.

- --
Paul W. Schleck
***@novia.net
http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/
Finger ***@novia.net for PGP Public Key
Bohgosity BumaskiL
2011-06-06 06:28:38 UTC
Permalink
Moderator: Derek <***@pointerstop.ca>
Moderator: Gail <***@worldnet.att.net>
Moderator: Galen <***@earthlink.net>
Moderator: ~jan <***@jjspond.us>
Moderator: Kathy30a <***@aol.com>
Moderator: Phyllis <***@gmail.com>
Moderator: Jim ***@gmail.com

If Phyllis and Jim are still moderating, then they are doing it
without functional e-mail addresses. That is possible, and it is less
than desirable. ~jan's and Kathy30a's address are also non-functional.
I hav not tested Gail's or Gary's address, because those names are new
to me, and Gail's address is not among the functionaries listed in
this article:
64e98304-9a4d-41a7-931c-***@n10g2000yqf.googlegroups.com
. I saw them on a verbose record of why news:rec.ponds.moderated was
created in the first place. Galen was voted off the island.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Post by Steve Bonine
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
only two problem posters are in r.m.t.
So ignore them and get on with your life.
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
Post by Steve Bonine
Another requirement is a moderation team and a moderation
platform.
rec.ponds.moderated is doing fine with one moderator.
Until that person goes away.
It is interesting to see how false memes develop in Usenet article
threads. One person makes a false assertion, and others assume that
it is true just because someone asserted it, and continue
propagating
the false meme because they are more focused on arguing with that
person versus checking the assertion against easily available
primary
sources (Just sayin'...).
Anyway, I've worked closely with the rec.ponds.moderated moderation
team over the past couple of years, so I dropped them a line to
their
administrative contact address that is published in the headers of
their approved articles. They confirmed that their newsgroup
continues to be actively moderated by a team of multiple moderators.
- --
Paul W. Schleck
http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (SunOS)
iD8DBQFN2RdJ6Pj0az779o4RAlndAJwOul9urs6zxjTOj0HHuPZ+7EuxyQCfdjjH
CUNFlMuDd4y5Cpym/EtfQHE=
=027v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
LJS
2011-06-06 12:52:21 UTC
Permalink
On Jun 6, 1:28 am, "Bohgosity BumaskiL"
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
If Phyllis and Jim are still moderating, then they are doing it
without functional e-mail addresses. That is possible, and it is less
than desirable. ~jan's and Kathy30a's address are also non-functional.
I hav not tested Gail's or Gary's address, because those names are new
to me, and Gail's address is not among the functionaries listed in
 . I saw them on a verbose record of why news:rec.ponds.moderated was
created in the first place. Galen was voted off the island.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Post by Steve Bonine
 only two problem posters are in r.m.t.
So ignore them and get on with your life.
Post by Steve Bonine
Another requirement is a moderation team and a moderation
platform.
rec.ponds.moderated is doing fine with one moderator.
Until that person goes away.
It is interesting to see how false memes develop in Usenet article
threads.  One person makes a false assertion, and others assume that
it is true just because someone asserted it, and continue
propagating
the false meme because they are more focused on arguing with that
person versus checking the assertion against easily available
primary
sources (Just sayin'...).
Anyway, I've worked closely with the rec.ponds.moderated moderation
team over the past couple of years, so I dropped them a line to
their
administrative contact address that is published in the headers of
their approved articles.  They confirmed that their newsgroup
continues to be actively moderated by a team of multiple moderators.
- --
Paul W. Schleck
http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (SunOS)
iD8DBQFN2RdJ6Pj0az779o4RAlndAJwOul9urs6zxjTOj0HHuPZ+7EuxyQCfdjjH
CUNFlMuDd4y5Cpym/EtfQHE=
=027v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
get your own group and leave this one alone.
Use your delete key and just tallk about music, this is getting as bad
as the spam

Bohgosity BumaskiL
2011-06-06 05:16:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Bonine
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
only two problem posters are in r.m.t.
So ignore them and get on with your life.
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
Post by Steve Bonine
Another requirement is a moderation team and a moderation
platform.
rec.ponds.moderated is doing fine with one moderator.
Until that person goes away.
I was mistaken when I wrote that. My first search for the information
found about the first posting of the charter. The last post I read
mentions six people (without e-mail addresses).
LJS
2011-06-06 12:51:30 UTC
Permalink
On Jun 6, 12:16 am, "Bohgosity BumaskiL"
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
Post by Steve Bonine
 only two problem posters are in r.m.t.
So ignore them and get on with your life.
Post by Steve Bonine
Another requirement is a moderation team and a moderation
platform.
rec.ponds.moderated is doing fine with one moderator.
Until that person goes away.
I was mistaken when I wrote that. My first search for the information
found about the first posting of the charter. The last post I read
mentions six people (without e-mail addresses).
get your own group and leave this one alone.
Use your delete key and just tallk about music, this is getting as bad
as the spam
Vilen
2011-05-22 10:26:27 UTC
Permalink
On 20 Mai, 04:23, "Bohgosity BumaskiL"
- Zitierten Text anzeigen -
May be at first it is sufficient to try the rule that anybody is
permitted to open a new topic once in e.g. 48 hours.

Best Regards
Yuri Vilenkin
Bohgosity BumaskiL
2011-06-06 05:12:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vilen
On 20 Mai, 04:23, "Bohgosity BumaskiL"
- Zitierten Text anzeigen -
May be at first it is sufficient to try the rule that anybody is
permitted to open a new topic once in e.g. 48 hours.
Best Regards
Yuri Vilenkin
That would be effective against the biggest problem in
news:rec.music.theory, almost certainly, and it is still a rule of
content, although it could be mechanically configured, once I had all
of Wereo_Boy's aliases rejistered in a group or something.

I think content rules, strong against what most people find offensive,
and weakly favouring what the group was created for. Those would
nearly eliminate posts from Wereo_Boy, with minimal effect on threads
that could better be crossposted into sci.physics, music promotion,
alt.noise, or some regional, jeneral, or social group.
LJS
2011-06-06 12:50:54 UTC
Permalink
On Jun 6, 12:12 am, "Bohgosity BumaskiL"
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
Post by Vilen
On 20 Mai, 04:23, "Bohgosity BumaskiL"
- Zitierten Text anzeigen -
May be at first it is sufficient to  try the rule that anybody is
permitted to open a new topic once in e.g. 48 hours.
Best Regards
Yuri Vilenkin
That would be effective against the biggest problem in
news:rec.music.theory, almost certainly, and it is still a rule of
content, although it could be mechanically configured, once I had all
of Wereo_Boy's aliases rejistered in a group or something.
I think content rules, strong against what most people find offensive,
and weakly favouring what the group was created for. Those would
nearly eliminate posts from Wereo_Boy, with minimal effect on threads
that could better be crossposted into sci.physics, music promotion,
alt.noise, or some regional, jeneral, or social group.
get your own group and leave this one alone.
Use your delete key and just tallk about music, this is getting as bad
as the spam
LJS
2011-05-22 13:36:31 UTC
Permalink
And one other guy that keeps posting things about another newsgroup
about something. Who knows what.



On May 19, 9:23 pm, "Bohgosity BumaskiL"
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
Post by Steve Bonine
Post by paramucho
I've posted to moderated groups for many years. There has been the
odd disagreement with the moderators, but they've been rare. On the
whole, moderators do a rather tedious, unpaid job for which they
receive not a lot in the way of thanks. The idea that they are
meglamaniacs ruling the known universe is *usually* an accusation
levelled by real meglamaniacs who want to rule the known universe
through the medium of their QWERTY superpowers.
The moderators of Usenet offer their thanks for the kind words . . .
even the megalomaniac ones.
Post by paramucho
On the plus side, some of the most interesting threads I've been
involved in have been in the moderated group, simply because the
thread *did* stay on topic and did stay polite, in a
stiff-upper-lip
kind-of-way.
There are advantages and disadvantages of both moderated and
unmoderated newsgroups.  The best option is to have a choice.
Post by paramucho
Another advantage of the moderated group was that there was much less
traffic. So, it was not unusual for members to post worked-out
articles to the group, knowing that their effort was not going to be
buried some 10 milliseconds later by someone screaming wildly about
all the evil coming out of the walls that surrounded them.
There is no doubt that the signal-to-noise ratio on moderated
newsgroups tends to be higher.  But the price you pay for that is
having someone else select articles for you.  Some people think
that's a reasonable trade off; some think it's the kiss of death.
That's why choice is good.
Reducing noise through moderation is only half of the solution.  If
there are no submissions, the signal-to-noise ratio is zero which is
not an improvement.
Post by paramucho
Moderated groups don't kill off unmoderated groups. And, in my
experience, posters sometimes moved a thread from the moderated group
to the unmoderated group to get faster and unfettered transmission.
One could be a gentleman one minute and a street fighter the next...
I am not a musician.  But I see no reason to be a street fighter on
a
newsgroup devoted to music-related topics.  It is imminently
possible
to disagree without indulging in personal attacks.
I think so, too, and really, only two problem posters are in r.m.t.
One is a poser, or an all-time-highest-volume contributor,
pseudo-intellectual troll, who will write of things he knows nothing
about and pretty much shift hiz opinion to attack anybody he feels
like attacking, evidence or not, no holds barred. It's peculiar how
hiz language seems civil on the surface, while there really must be a
sad composer-wanna-be behind hiz initials. The other troll attacks
himself in the most profane way, using about ten pseudonyms. Hiz total
volume (nym adjusted) probably exceeds the poser. I do not care to get
music out of the poser or censure the profane one (who might actually
write music), anymore. I grew tired of it. When you wrestle with pigs,
you get dirty.
I won't say that it's impossible for that poser to make a valuable
contribution.
I will say that I do not expect it; no musical output.
There is a third guy who I find annoying, sometimes, and I see no
solid reason why I should be able to defeat him with anything but
examples, some of which might involve changes to hiz code.
Post by Steve Bonine
It is occasionally an interesting study to observe the difference in
how the same thread develops in an unmoderated newsgroup and a
companion moderated newsgroup.
Post by paramucho
Thus, I think having a choice between RMT and RMP would provide a
wider spectrum of choice and opportunity, and a possibility of
synergy.
Maybe.  It depends on whether enough people are interested in
participating in the moderated newsgroup.  If the current
participants
are already coping with the noise by ignoring it (perhaps with the
help of killfiles) then there seems little motivation for a
moderated
companion newsgroup.
Post by paramucho
Post by J.B. Wood
After all these years I intend to stay with r.m.t unless it devolves
into 100% spam.
Perhaps you have killfiles on--the past few weeks or so it has come
very close to that figure. The regular traffic is certainly fairly
low at the moment. I've found less of interest over the last year
or
so (although I've been a bit distracted by other things as well).
I can think of a couple of reasons that a moderated newsgroup might
thrive.  It might draw participation from several existing
newsgroups
from people who are fed up with the current low signal-to-noise ratio.
It might motivate some old timers to return and/or current
participants to contribute more.
On the other hand, if the topic breadth of the new moderated group is
narrow, there is unlikely to be sufficient participation to maintain a
viable discussion.
Post by paramucho
In any case, it isn't a matter of one or the other. We can have both.
Yes, but a few things are needed.  Perhaps first is a coherent RFD.
The big-8 board must approve the new newsgroup, and they will look for
enough support to give the proposed group a reasonable chance of
success.  So far I count only two supporters.
Another requirement is a moderation team and a moderation platform.
rec.ponds.moderated is doing fine with one moderator.
JWL
2011-03-18 07:56:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by paramucho
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 06:41:42 -0400, "J.B. Wood"
Post by J.B. Wood
Hello, and while moderated newsgroups have their place, I generally
favor unmoderated ones. I just view spammers and OT posters
(myself
included on occasion) as the price one pays for this freedom.
Killfiles can really clean things up on the viewing end. I don't
appreciate the delays that one can encounter when getting a post on
a moderated group. I also don't like to be subject to the vagaries
of the moderator. After all these years I intend to stay with r.m.t
unless it devolves into 100% spam.
I've posted to moderated groups for many years. There has been the odd
disagreement with the moderators, but they've been rare. On the whole,
moderators do a rather tedious, unpaid job for which they receive not
a lot in the way of thanks. The idea that they are meglamaniacs ruling
the known universe is *usually* an accusation levelled by real
meglamaniacs who want to rule the known universe through the medium of
their QWERTY superpowers.
On the plus side, some of the most interesting threads I've been
involved in have been in the moderated group, simply because the
thread *did* stay on topic and did stay polite, in a stiff-upper-lip
kind-of-way.
Another advantage of the moderated group was that there was much less
traffic. So, it was not unusual for members to post worked-out
articles to the group, knowing that their effort was not going to be
buried some 10 milliseconds later by someone screaming wildly about
all the evil coming out of the walls that surrounded them.
Moderated groups don't kill off unmoderated groups. And, in my
experience, posters sometimes moved a thread from the moderated group
to the unmoderated group to get faster and unfettered transmission.
One could be a gentleman one minute and a street fighter the next...
Thus, I think having a choice between RMT and RMP would provide a
wider spectrum of choice and opportunity, and a possibility of
synergy.
I would encourage people to make _that_ cross-post.
I might even reject some things that *don't*.
It would be like a cross-post between alt.usage.english
and alt.english.usage.
_______
http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/Sound/Mozart.mp3
Boccherini is in ID3 tags, now, and it's an octave lower.
Post by paramucho
Post by J.B. Wood
After all these years I intend to stay with r.m.t unless it
devolves
into 100% spam.
Perhaps you have killfiles on--the past few weeks or so it has come
very close to that figure. The regular traffic is certainly fairly low
at the moment. I've found less of interest over the last year or so
(although I've been a bit distracted by other things as well).
In any case, it isn't a matter of one or the other. We can have both.
Post by J.B. Wood
(Hey, do any of us old timers miss Al Silverman?)
Not particularly (and I hope he's well). But I do miss Matt.
Ian
iL_weReo
2011-03-19 05:25:12 UTC
Permalink
On Mar 5, 12:59 am, "Bohgosity BumaskiL"
Post by Bohgosity BumaskiL
rec.music.practice Care and enjoyment in music practice (Moderated)
C01  Description and Purpose
rec.music.practice would be a moderated newsgroup that provides a friendly,
respectful forum for discussion of all aspects of Mathematics, Phyics, and
psycho-acoustics that are relevant to music. rec.music.practice appeals to a
wide range of people people involved in both recreational and professional
aspects of establishing, maintaining, propagating, and rendering musical
repertoire. Participants range from novices to people with many years of
experience; from those with a day job, to those whose day job involves
music; from specialists to solo producers; serial to orchestral; enjineers,
scientists, and artists. Sharing ideas, asking questions, or lurking are
welcome from all who want to learn.
C02  The Following Is Prohibited
All posts containing these items will be rejected, and returned with
explanation if permitted by automated software.
  * Excessive cross-posting, although limited, on-topic cross-posting
     is permitted (many *servers* disallow more than five cross-postings)
  * Commercial posts or Excessive Multiple Posting (bot actuated).
  * Obscenities.
  * Excessive morphing/nym shifting ("excessive" is at moderator discretion)
  * Implied or direct threats, slander, insults, bigotry, prejudice
     or harassment
  * Flaming, baiting, flooding, and personal verbal attacks
  * Unjustified kritisizm, especially unusable kriteek.
  * Posts advocating violence or containing physical threats
  * Attacks on others based on gender, race, sexual orientation
     or religion
  * Chain letters
  * Binaries, other than pgp signatures, x-face headers, and other
     ancillary article meta-data. Links are fine.
  * Forgery of names, valid email addresses or approval headers
  * Excessive quoting of old material, with little new content
     (these will be judgment calls made by moderators)
  * Personal identification information associated with anyone other
     than yourself (e.g.  residential addresses, phone numbers and
     government identifications).
  * Content advocating acts that would be intrinsically illegal
     in most places
  * Copyright violations.  (However, pointers to news articles,
     blogs, etc. that are on-topic are welcome.  They must comply with
     fair use standards.)
C03  Permitted Content
   * Melody
   * Harmony
   * Counterpoint
   * Baseline
   * Dissonance
   * Time Signatures
   * Consonance (Archaically, Assonance)
   * Chords, tablature, and numeric notation
   * Just Intonation and Equal Temperament
   * Temperament or tampering with established tunings
   * Timbre Harmonics, patches, and transforms.
   * History of Musicians and Temperament
   * Publishing technique (How to use your web host)
C04  Charter Implementation
See Moderation Policy and Practice.
C05  Changes to Moderation Policy
Proposals for changes to this document can pass with a two thirds majority
vote. All who approve this document should send it to
sufficient approval has been met. Changes may also be discussed in this
thread or proposed in a pre-amble of your submission to that board.
C07  (Most of Section Deleted under "If it goes without saying, then let it
go without saying.")
(Moderator Contact Addresses, first copy)
C08  Readership Participation & Responsibility
  * Request changes to moderation policy and participate in discussion of
changes.
  * Privately ask for all moderators to review a specific rejected
     post (within practical numerical limits determined by moderators.)
   * Nominate new moderators.
MODERATION POLICY: rec.music.practice
MPP01  Purpose
rec.music.practice would be a moderated newsgroup that provides a friendly,
respectful forum for discussion of all aspects of Mathematics, Phyics, and
psycho-acoustics that are relevant to music. rec.music.practice appeals to a
wide range of people involved in both recreational and professional aspects
of establishing, maintaining, propagating, and rendering musical repertoire.
Participants range from novices to people with many years of experience;
from those with a day job, to those whose day job involves music; from
specialists to solo producers; serial to orchestral; enjineers, scientists,
and artists. Sharing ideas, asking questions, or lurking are welcome from
all who want to learn.
MPP02  Automated (robotic) Moderation Software
Moderators should employ automated moderation software to initially screen
and pre-filter all incoming posts, and to ensure that all posts meet certain
current moderation policies.  Posts that do not will be automatically
returned along with a brief explanation, provided that such posts have a
valid return address.  All posts that are approved by automated software
will be forwarded to human moderators for further examination.
MPP03  Cross-posting
Cross-posting to related groups based on subject matter (e.g.,rec.music.*,
alt.music.*, and groups related to lyrics in links) will be allowed. No
cross-posting to irrelevant groups will be permitted.  Such cross-posted
messages shall be returned, provided a valid return email address is
provided.
MPP04  Authorship of Posts
Anyone will be allowed to post as long as they are not forging another
poster's name or address. Anonymous posting will be allowed. Occasional
name-shifting may be permitted, but excessive name-shifting will not be
permitted, as per C03.
MPP05  Human Moderation
After approval by any automated software, messages are forwarded for review,
based upon C02 & C03.  Rejected messages shall be returned to a poster,
provided a valid return address is available. An explanation for rejection
shall be included, and it may be automated in case of blocked senders.
Moderators do not add, delete, or edit anything within a post. Tags are not
added. With exceptions for bot-actuated rejection and anonymous submission,
a moderator randomly assigned will pass all rejected articles back to a
submitter, along with either guidance for changes, or a reason for rejection
of a subject. In rare cases, individuals who persist in sending material
that does not meet content guidelines in this charter will be blocked from
making submissions to any moderator: Inclusion of an individual on a block
list requires consent of two thirds of moderators, and it may happen without
collusion.
Moderators permit posts that may contain technically incorrect information,
provided that the post is not deemed to be deliberately deceptive. Any
approved post that is forwarded to this newsgroup, and contains incorrect
information, may and should be followed up by posts that attempt to correct
the misinformation. Such corrective posts may be made by any interested
person/s in the newsgroup.
All personal posts made by moderators go through the same complete process
as posts made by the general readership of the group. Moderators do not
review their own posts, nor those of a relative. Moderators who fail to
abide by the charter and current moderation policy may be warned or removed
by other moderators; two thirds of a majority.
Posting with a valid or mangled-and-decipherable (munged) e-mail address
enables accountability.
MPP06  Moderator Approval and Rejection Policies
Moderators may consult with one another before deciding to pass or reject a
post whose content is borderline or questionable. This consultation may add
to the time-delay of the processing of a post.
If a post is rejected, it may be appealed to the Moderation Team, provided
it is seen as a legitimate request, and not as a disruptive attempt or
tactic to distract or flood the team with large numbers of obviously
inappropriate messages.
MPP07  Personal Advertising
Very limited personal advertising shall be permitted. Such advertising must
be directly related to music marketing. The number of ads permitted by any
one poster per any given time period shall be left to the discretion of the
moderators, with all posters subject to the same conditions. Links on the
last line of a post (Loosely, signatures) that otherwise follows in a thread
do not count under this policy.
MPP08  Ending Threads
Moderators reserve the right to end a thread that has veered significantly
off-topic, or that has become dominated by rehashing and/or repetition.
MPP10  Structure of the Human Moderation Team
(ignore dates that I do not set)
The review and moderation of posts that are approved by the automated
software program will be conducted by a Moderation Team.
The first moderation team members will be divided into two classes, and
appointed for one or two year terms, to end on August 31, 2008 and 2009
respectively.  Thereafter a new class of moderators will be elected annually
during the month of August, to serve two-year terms, beginning on September
1st of the election year and continuing through August 31st of the second
year after the election. The current moderation team will select each new
class of moderators, and election will be by a minimum 2/3 vote of the
current moderators.
The total number of moderators may be changed by the moderation team, which
will seek to maintain an equal number of members in each class. The general
readership of rec.music.practice are encouraged to propose/nominate
potential moderators to the team, as per C08.
Moderators may be re-elected.  The moderation team shall elect persons to
fill vacancies using the 2/3 criterion for election.
MPP11  Head Moderator
The moderation team may choose to elect a (head/chief/administrative)
moderator by a majority vote, if it deems such a position to be necessary.
The duties and responsibilities of such a position would be determined ...
read more »
I don't feel like readin awl that shit. Anyway, the Wereo destroy the
filters.
Loading...