> another issue that needs to be addressed is the name for this
> newsgroup. we would rather not see the word 'moderated' in the
> newsgroup name and hence SCIT.moderated is ruled out. changing the
> existing newsgroups format to a moderated one is simple in theory,
> but many systems across the country may not change their configuration
> to update this format in the near future and some may not do so at all!
Right now, I don't have a particular bias towards
scit.moderated or a moderated scit, nor do I have a workaround
for the problem above. But my suggestion is to not rule out anything
at this stage. The name scit.moderated at least has consistency in its
favor--there are scpakistan.moderated and scpunjab.moderated in the
works right now.
I made some comments in square brackets about the RFD. I hope that at
least some of them will generate some discussion.
(I had suggested to Suresh garu that the RFD draft be run by group-mentors.
To clarify, (as I understand) group-mentors is a usenet alias for some
volunteers among veteran usenet administrators, who would review a proposal
before it is posted, so as to improve its chances of making it through
the discussion process.
)
>
>
> R.F.D: soc.culture.indian.telugu
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Status: Automoderated
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> It is proposed that the USENET newsgroup soc.culture.indian.telugu (SCIT)
> be changed to an automoderated newsgroup. This RFD is a modification of
> the RFD for existing SCIT newsgroup. The period of discussion is three
> weeks and a Call For Vote (CFV) will appear soon [note: i'll add the
> date of vote here once we decide when the RFD goes out].
[ It may be worthwhile to briefly rehash the pop. of AP, arbitron estimate
(are they still being published?) of scit readers in the good old days
and similar statistical info here.]
>
> Automoderation:
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> The usenet group soc.culture.india.telugu was created to serve as a forum
> for discussion of Telugu culture and matters related to Andhra Pradesh.
> As you are aware, soc.culture.india (SCI) serves as a medium for
> discussion of matters of India-wide interest. It was intended that
> discussions on SCIT would cover subjects such as arts (kuchipudi etc),
> telugu literature, AP politics, developmental projects from AP, telugu
> movies etc.
>
> Unfortunately, for quite some time now, SCIT has been deluged with
> crossposts from other newsgroups. The contents of these posts have
> absolutely no relevance whatsoever to either Telugu culture or other
> topics suggested in the original charter of SCIT. This crossposting
> phenomenon has single handedly resulted in SCIT (in its current form of
> an unmoderated group) losing the purpose for which it was created.
[ Strongly suggest signal-to-noise ratio statistics here; tie in with
similar figures, if available in good-old-days. ]
>
> It is hence proposed that we bring automoderation to SCIT. The only
> purpose of automoderation is to eliminate any/all posts that are
> crossposted to more than one newsgroup i.e. an auto-moderator program
> will check for the newsgroup names and if there is more than one
> newsgroup specified in the post, it will be rejected.
[ Issue here: Should we close the door on future tweaking of automoderation
policies by specifying crosspost elimination only here? Would it make
sense to say that the moderation policy is to merely check for relevance
(for example) and then, maybe state that automoderation will be used for
this purpose? How did the srvaishnava people handle this part?
(I personally favor an extremely light-touch policy for moderation, so
the current formulation would be ok by me; but my opinion is not the
last word on this issue, which I think should be analysed in some detail.)
]
>
> *** POSTS WILL NOT BE CHECKED FOR THEIR CONTENTS *** (freedom of speech?!).
>
> It is expected that by eliminating the large number of crossposts,
> soc.culture.indian.telugu will be restored to its original form and serve
> the purpose for which it was created: i.e serve as a forum for people to
> discuss issues relating to telugu language and culture.
[ Should there be some statement explaining how the automoderation is to
be implemented--i.e., who will be responsible for running and maintaining
the bot, what will be done to make the process redundant and fail-safe,
etc. etc.? As a voter, I would want to know that the proposed ng will be
a reliable one, and not go the route of sci.info.
]
[ Bigger question--have we completely convinced ourselves that automoderation
is the best available solution?
]
>
> Kamala Anupindi
> Ramana Juvvadi
> Suresh Koichala
> Sitaramayya Ari
>
> PS: For a copy of the charter of SCIT and original RFD, please check
> URL: http:// (note: suresh, can i write your URL here??)
>
>
>