Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!panix!.POSTED.localhost!not-for-mail
From: Tristan Miller <tmiller@big-8.org>
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: 1st RfD: Mass-deletion of moderated groups without a moderator
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2025 09:44:13 -0600
Organization: Usenet Big-8 Management Board
Message-ID: <vno3se$ch7$1@reader2.panix.com>
References: <vla2t6$5g57$1@dont-email.me> <vlbk6b$gtv3$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2025 15:44:14 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader2.panix.com; posting-host="localhost:::1";
	logging-data="12839"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-CA
In-Reply-To: <vlbk6b$gtv3$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3281
Lines: 66

Greetings.

On 2025-01-04 09:30, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Big-8 Management Board <board@big-8.org> wrote:
>>                REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
> 
>> This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to remove the following
>> 101 moderated newsgroups.
> 
> The audience for potential moderators of these specific newsgroups is
> not to be found here in news.groups.
> 
>> DISTRIBUTION:
> 
>> news.announce.newgroups
>> news.groups.proposals
>> news.groups
> 
>> [...]
> 
> Brilliant stuff there, Way to literally go behind everybody's back.

Where do you suggest we post the RFD, then?

Should we cross-post the RFD to all of the affected groups?  I doubt our 
own news server would accept such an article, and others might also 
reject it for excessive cross-posting.  But maybe I am wrong.

Should we post a separate copy of the RFD to each of the affected 
groups?  Again, I'm worried this might trigger some automated 
spam/flooding filters.  But again, maybe I am wrong about this.

Besides the affected groups, is there a better place to reach an 
audience of potential moderators?

> I look forward to your next trick, mass rmgrouping of unmoderated Big 8
> newsgroups.

This has been done several times in the past, as documented on our 
website at <https://www.big-8.org/wiki/The_Great_Downsizing_2011/1> and 
<https://www.big-8.org/wiki/The_Great_Downsizing_2011/2>.

>> If you have any objections, please make them heard in moderated group
>> news.groups.proposals. The "Followup-To:" header is set on this message,
>> so simply replying to this post should do the right thing.
> 
> You MUST NOT instruct me where to post my followup, It's my decision,
> not yours.

No one is instructing you to do anything.  Our message *requests* you to 
reply on news.groups.proposals as this is the only place the Board is 
guaranteed to be monitoring the discussion.

In 2022 we initiated an RFD on whether to continue using 
news.groups.proposals in this way, or to switch to the unmoderated 
news.groups.  It doesn't appear as though we received any comments from 
you.  The community's reaction to the RFD was mixed and so the Board 
voted to preserve the status quo.  That said, you (or anyone else) is 
welcome to start another RFD of your own.

Regards,
Tristan

-- 
Usenet Big-8 Management Board
https://www.big-8.org/
board@big-8.org