"Vaughn Simon" wrote:

"Jim Logajan" wrote:
But also did
you use the same confidence check in determining whether you should
use AT&T as your Usenet provider (they must have some Terms of
Service you must abide by even on Usenet postings)?

Bad comparison. I am a customer of AT&T. They please me on a
day-to-day basis or I fire them and move on to the next ISP.

Well that's the point I was trying to make. Hmmm. Guess I did a bad job
communicating.

Consider this: anyone can create a group

Exactly, that is why there are way too many groups. The world does
not need any more Google groups.

Ah, but you can't filter out or stop the creation of new forums. And not
all forums are identical in nature - that's the great thing about having a
choice.

Lastly, I would be very happy to see someone else deal with such
moderation. Got any names you'd suggest as possibilties that we could
draft?

I already have made a suggestion; God.

But I'm an atheist. :-)

Until then, we are better off without
a hall monitor. Learn to use filters. I use them all the time and
they work fine.

If filters were as effective as you believe then we wouldn't be having this
discussion.

I don't use filters and have no problems ignoring or disregarding posts -
but I do have a problem when this group's membership declines because other
people have problems with the naked and uncontrollable animosities. They
are moving to other groups (or simply leaving all online forums)
irrespective of our own mechanisms. I've simply decided to go out of my way
a bit and expend some effort trying to help people who might like an
alternative. It isn't meant to be perfect - just hopefully better.

I still think you should be the moderator of an alternative group - none is
so effective as the one who is most skeptical.