On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 06:16:27 -0000 (UTC)
Jason Evans <jsevans@mailfence.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 17:34:47 -0500, Steve Bonine wrote:
>
> > The most recent article in news.newusers.questions is more than three
> > years old. It would be useful to know whether that is because the
> > moderation path has been broken for three years or because there are no
> > new users with questions.
>
> It's because the former moderators retired and even if they wanted to
> moderate it again, they no longer have access to moderation software.

I have seen before in "moderator wanted" threads the phrase that the previous
moderators no longer have access to moderation software and I find it
puzzling. Why can't they reinstall or redownload or whatever the software
they were using in the past ? Any new moderator would also need to use
moderation software so why is it that a new moderator can somehow gain access
to such software but the old moderators are unable to do so ?

On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 15:15:32 -0000 (UTC), Spiros Bousbouras wrote:

> I have seen before in "moderator wanted" threads the phrase that the
> previous moderators no longer have access to moderation software and I
> find it puzzling. Why can't they reinstall or redownload or whatever the
> software they were using in the past ? Any new moderator would also need
> to use moderation software so why is it that a new moderator can somehow
> gain access to such software but the old moderators are unable to do so
> ?

Two reasons.

The first simplest reason is that previously, you could pay for hosted
moderation service and a lot of people used that. That service is no
longer available, but the software[1] is still available.

The second reason is because the software is clunky and rather difficult
to setup but fairly easy to use once it is running. It assumes that you
have some rather advanced Unix/Linux experience circa year 2000 to set up.
Unix/Linux users today would still find it challenging without a fair
amount of research.

We need new moderation software that is both easy to setup and use and
doesn't require advanced technical knowledge to get going.

[1]
STUMP:
https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/stump/

WebSTUMP (webgui frontend):
https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/webstump/

Jason Evans wrote:

> We need new moderation software that is both easy to setup and use and
> doesn't require advanced technical knowledge to get going.

Dream on. You cannot find people who are willing to invest the time to
install existing software; who in their right mind would take on the
project of creating new and improved software when there is no audience
to use it?

If you - the Board - really want to contribute something to Usenet, set
up a moderation platform and make it available to anyone who is willing
to take on the moderation of a dead newsgroup. The same platform can be
used to moderate many newsgroups, and the incremental effort of adding a
new group to the mix is tiny compared to the effort of creating the
platform from scratch.

The reality is that the method of moderation isn't the issue. In this
specific case [news.newusers.questions] you're assuming that there are
new users who would post questions to a newsgroup. That's a little like
the classic "If you are having problems with email, send an email to
....". I have this mental image of the moderator of the newsgroup each
day checking the queue and saying "Nope. No new users today."

In the more general case, the chance of a newsgroup that has been dead
for years reviving is tiny, even with the best of hardware/software
support. The users are long gone and have found other means of
discussing the topic of interest. Why would they return to Usenet?

On 2022-05-01, Jason Evans <jsevans@mailfence.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 15:15:32 -0000 (UTC), Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
> We need new moderation software that is both easy to setup and use and
> doesn't require advanced technical knowledge to get going.

I would be willing to write moderation software but I'd like to
understand if there's actually an audience for it. I see Usenet as
pretty empty these days. Is there really a need to moderate newsgroups
through software (e.g. organizations that would need it?) As it is
most groups only have a few posts a day.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In <t4m45i$3rf$1@dont-email.me> Steve Bonine <spb@pobox.com> writes:

>Jason Evans wrote:

>> We need new moderation software that is both easy to setup and use and
>> doesn't require advanced technical knowledge to get going.

>Dream on. You cannot find people who are willing to invest the time to
>install existing software; who in their right mind would take on the
>project of creating new and improved software when there is no audience
>to use it?

>If you - the Board - really want to contribute something to Usenet, set
>up a moderation platform and make it available to anyone who is willing
>to take on the moderation of a dead newsgroup. The same platform can be
>used to moderate many newsgroups, and the incremental effort of adding a
>new group to the mix is tiny compared to the effort of creating the
>platform from scratch.

Instead of free, I would suggest a nominal annual fee, say between $1
and $5. Services that support micropayments like these are easily
available. The money raised would not be significant, but it would
serve at least two purposes:

1. It would be an "I am alive" beacon for the moderation team of a
newsgroup. If the payments stop, the administrators of the moderation
site can inquire about the status of the newsgroup, suspend moderation
services, possibly refer the matter to a Moderator Vacancy Investigation
(MVI) if there is no answer, or even a reply indicating that the
newsgroup is permanently abandoned by the previous team.

2. Steve and I appear to have at least two hobbies where the
practitioners can be almost pathologically cheap (and lazy). No one is
going to willingly part with money, however small, if they are not
serious. It is almost inevitable human nature that just being given
something for free will not be respected or appreciated. Not being able
to afford even a nominal sum like this suggests that prospective
moderators are either insufficiently motivated, or completely destitute,
and would not be good candidates to moderate a newsgroup.

Consider for example, the (almost) free Fuggerei housing in Augsburg,
Germany. There is a nominal rent of less than 1 Euro per year, and
residents are expected to make small contributions of time and labor to
support the community.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/after-almost-500-years-german-utopia-is-still-going-strong-180973787/

Residents also have to be Catholic, but an "orthodoxy" requirement of
being supportive of Usenet in general would suffice here.

- --
Paul W. Schleck
pschleck@panix.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEARECAAYFAmKGQdUACgkQ6Pj0az779o5gIgCbBSIum47/wFcOok4ZedRNDAMb
WRAAn04i/ksmqv6gSg5Ua/CLxU6FWJKI
=y3Zj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----