Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [PrimeNumbers] META: public appology

Expand Messages
  • Jon Perry
    Hmmm, slow down? Why make such preposterous rules. Disucssions are informal, your rule sounds fascist. Would you allow a post daring to suggest that you are
    Message 1 of 12 , Aug 29, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Hmmm, slow down?

      Why make such preposterous rules. Disucssions are informal, your rule sounds
      fascist.

      Would you allow a post daring to suggest that you are not fit to be a
      moderator?

      As an unfairly moderators participant, I feel enough moderation already
      exists - why invent concepts such as freedom of speech and democracy if you
      then fail to implement them according to their spirit?

      Do we get to vote on a moderator? I personally enjoyed this list a lot more
      in the good old days of instant messages and no moderation.

      Jon Perry
      perry@...
      http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~perry/maths/
      http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~perry/DIVMenu/
      BrainBench MVP for HTML and JavaScript
      http://www.brainbench.com

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Nathan Russell [mailto:nrussell@...]
      Sent: 28 August 2003 23:11
      To: primenumbers@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [PrimeNumbers] META: public appology


      As a moderator (and the newest moderator) on this list, I feel
      somewhat obligated to keep up to date with approving new members
      and messages.

      Since I just started the semester, it's been taking me at times
      some time to do so, but I intend to get all members/messages
      decided upon within 10 hours in future.

      How to get your message approved in one easy step:

      1. Don't make bizarre unjustified claims or attempt proofs by
      repito ad nauseum. That simple. I don't mean to make things
      hard on anyone.

      Nathan


      Unsubscribe by an email to: primenumbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      The Prime Pages : http://www.primepages.org/



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • Nathan Russell
      --On Friday, August 29, 2003 10:17:19 AM +0100 Jon Perry ... I do not appreciate my voluntary efforts on a mailing list being compared with fascism. You are
      Message 2 of 12 , Aug 29, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        --On Friday, August 29, 2003 10:17:19 AM +0100 Jon Perry
        <perry@...> wrote:

        > Hmmm, slow down?
        >
        > Why make such preposterous rules. Disucssions are informal,
        > your rule sounds fascist.

        I do not appreciate my voluntary efforts on a mailing list being
        compared with fascism. You are free to create a list of your own
        and ban me from it. Your being on moderated status here - a
        fact which you were the first to publically mention - is orders
        of magnitude away from the repressive government to which you
        refer.

        > Would you allow a post daring to suggest that you are not fit
        > to be a moderator?

        Yes. Note that I allowed this one. I see you copied this reply
        to Professor Caldwell. If he feels I am unfit to be a moderator,
        I'm sure he will act accordingly. Frankly, I would almost
        welcome
        the free time and absense of personal insults. I must say,
        though,
        that the discussion is drifting off topic. If it gets much
        further
        I would prefer it be confined to the three of us.

        > As an unfairly moderators participant, I feel enough
        > moderation already exists - why invent concepts such as
        > freedom of speech and democracy if you then fail to implement
        > them according to their spirit?

        This is not a publically owned or government-run list. As such,
        the US Constitution's guarantee of free speech does not apply.
        If
        I go into a privately owned shopping mall, and begin cursing and
        insulting people at random, I will very likely be thrown out.

        > Do we get to vote on a moderator? I personally enjoyed this
        > list a lot more in the good old days of instant messages and
        > no moderation.

        If you want to create a list in which moderators are elected,
        feel free to do so. Creating a Yahoogroup takes about 3 minutes
        and is free. I manage several of them as owner. I don't think
        a list of this size can be run completely without moderation, at
        least without discussions becoming solely about the theories of
        specific individuals and ending in debates which shed more heat
        than light, and spam everyone.

        Nathan
      • Andy Swallow
        I must say, I pretty much agree with Jon. Ok, there is (as far as I know) only a very small amount of genuine spam that comes to this list. And there are also
        Message 3 of 12 , Aug 29, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          I must say, I pretty much agree with Jon. Ok, there is (as far as I
          know) only a very small amount of genuine spam that comes to this list.
          And there are also some posts that are just badly thought rubbish. And
          yes, some of those posts are from Jon! But I much prefer to let people
          decide for themselves what is rubbish and what is not, without having to
          wait for the odd few moderators to give their mighty opinions.

          Hands up for an unmoderated list!

          Andy
        • Nathan Russell
          --On Friday, August 29, 2003 9:56 PM +0100 Andy Swallow ... I have rejected 3 messages in the month I have been a moderator. I approve 2 or 3 every time I
          Message 4 of 12 , Aug 29, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            --On Friday, August 29, 2003 9:56 PM +0100 Andy Swallow
            <umistphd2003@...> wrote:

            >
            > I must say, I pretty much agree with Jon. Ok, there is (as far
            > as I know) only a very small amount of genuine spam that comes
            > to this list. And there are also some posts that are just
            > badly thought rubbish. And yes, some of those posts are from
            > Jon! But I much prefer to let people decide for themselves
            > what is rubbish and what is not, without having to wait for
            > the odd few moderators to give their mighty opinions.
            >
            > Hands up for an unmoderated list!
            >
            > Andy

            I have rejected 3 messages in the month I have been a moderator.
            I approve 2 or 3 every time I check my email. The promise of
            approval or rejection (with a given reason, and signed with my
            name) within 10 hours still stands. This is true for posts sent
            by any member of this list, any time of the day, night, and
            week.

            Nathan
          • Milton Brown
            I completely agree. These self-proclaimed moderators are not good for the prime number messages. Milton L. Brown miltbrown@earthlink.net ... From: Andy
            Message 5 of 12 , Aug 29, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              I completely agree.

              These self-proclaimed "moderators" are not good for the prime number
              messages.

              Milton L. Brown
              miltbrown@...


              -----Original Message-----
              From: Andy Swallow [mailto:umistphd2003@...]
              Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 1:56 PM
              To: primenumbers@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [PrimeNumbers] META: public appology


              I must say, I pretty much agree with Jon. Ok, there is (as far as I
              know) only a very small amount of genuine spam that comes to this list.
              And there are also some posts that are just badly thought rubbish. And
              yes, some of those posts are from Jon! But I much prefer to let people
              decide for themselves what is rubbish and what is not, without having to
              wait for the odd few moderators to give their mighty opinions.

              Hands up for an unmoderated list!

              Andy

              Unsubscribe by an email to: primenumbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              The Prime Pages : http://www.primepages.org/



              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            • Ken Davis
              Hi, I believe this list is as unmoderated as practical. There are now multiple moderators on this list. (spread around the world to ensure minimal delay to new
              Message 6 of 12 , Aug 29, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi,
                I believe this list is as unmoderated as practical.
                There are now multiple moderators on this list. (spread around the
                world to ensure minimal delay to new applicants).
                Up until now joining the list has been simple a matter of signing up.
                This has resulted (in recent weeks) in a number of new ids whose sole
                purpose was to send spam (mainly porn) to our list.
                I for one did not appreciate this.
                Our job (as I understand it) is to ensure that people joining the
                list (appear to be) real people interested in the subject of prime
                numbers.
                As for existing members, only two have their posts moderated.
                (and then only to ensure they don't stray to far off topic).
                All other member's posts arrive with no human intervention.
                Cheers
                Ken

                --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com, Andy Swallow <umistphd2003@y...>
                wrote:
                >
                > I must say, I pretty much agree with Jon. Ok, there is (as far as I
                > know) only a very small amount of genuine spam that comes to this
                list.
                > And there are also some posts that are just badly thought rubbish.
                And
                > yes, some of those posts are from Jon! But I much prefer to let
                people
                > decide for themselves what is rubbish and what is not, without
                having to
                > wait for the odd few moderators to give their mighty opinions.
                >
                > Hands up for an unmoderated list!
                >
                > Andy
              • Dan Morenus
                Frankly, as I have at least two members of this list in my kill file, I get relatively little spam. However, I have wished for a moderator on occasion and I
                Message 7 of 12 , Aug 29, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  Frankly, as I have at least two members of this list in my kill file, I
                  get relatively little spam. However, I have wished for a moderator on
                  occasion and I am happy to see that we now have one. Imagine how useful
                  this list might become if SoBig.G happened upon it. Thanks for your
                  efforts, Nathan.

                  --Dan Morenus

                  Nathan Russell wrote:
                  >
                  > --On Friday, August 29, 2003 9:56 PM +0100 Andy Swallow
                  > <umistphd2003@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > >
                  > > I must say, I pretty much agree with Jon. Ok, there is (as far
                  > > as I know) only a very small amount of genuine spam that comes
                  > > to this list. And there are also some posts that are just
                  > > badly thought rubbish. And yes, some of those posts are from
                  > > Jon! But I much prefer to let people decide for themselves
                  > > what is rubbish and what is not, without having to wait for
                  > > the odd few moderators to give their mighty opinions.
                  > >
                  > > Hands up for an unmoderated list!
                  > >
                  > > Andy
                  >
                  > I have rejected 3 messages in the month I have been a moderator.
                  > I approve 2 or 3 every time I check my email. The promise of
                  > approval or rejection (with a given reason, and signed with my
                  > name) within 10 hours still stands. This is true for posts sent
                  > by any member of this list, any time of the day, night, and
                  > week.
                  >
                  > Nathan
                  >
                  >
                  > Unsubscribe by an email to: primenumbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  > The Prime Pages : http://www.primepages.org/
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

                  -- Dan Morenus (dmorenus@...)

                  -- This parachute is not warranted to be suitable --
                  -- for any purpose, including descending safely --
                  -- from an airplane to the ground. --
                • Mark Rodenkirch
                  I see the following reasons to moderate the group: 1) Spam. 2) Off-topic posts such as those espousing political views. 3) Trolls. The choice is to either
                  Message 8 of 12 , Aug 29, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I see the following reasons to moderate the group:

                    1) Spam.
                    2) Off-topic posts such as those espousing political views.
                    3) Trolls.

                    The choice is to either moderate to keep these things off the list
                    before anyone else sees them or to delete the posts once they have
                    reached the forum. I would prefer not to see them. People have left
                    this group because of the childish behavior of some members of the
                    groups (re: 3). Others have left this group because people such as
                    myself didn't want this group to become a political hot bed over the
                    war in Iraq (re: 2 and 3).

                    --Mark

                    > I completely agree.
                    >
                    > These self-proclaimed "moderators" are not good for the prime number
                    > messages.
                    >
                    > -----Original Message-----
                    > From: Andy Swallow [mailto:umistphd2003@...]
                    >
                    > I must say, I pretty much agree with Jon. Ok, there is (as far as I
                    > know) only a very small amount of genuine spam that comes to this list.
                    > And there are also some posts that are just badly thought rubbish. And
                    > yes, some of those posts are from Jon! But I much prefer to let people
                    > decide for themselves what is rubbish and what is not, without having
                    > to
                    > wait for the odd few moderators to give their mighty opinions.
                    >
                    > Hands up for an unmoderated list!

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Nathan Russell
                    --On Friday, August 29, 2003 7:47 PM -0700 Dan Morenus ... For what it s worth, I am only one of 3 active moderators. I appreciate the compliments, though I
                    Message 9 of 12 , Aug 29, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --On Friday, August 29, 2003 7:47 PM -0700 Dan Morenus
                      <dmorenus@...> wrote:

                      > Frankly, as I have at least two members of this list in my
                      > kill file, I get relatively little spam. However, I have
                      > wished for a moderator on occasion and I am happy to see that
                      > we now have one. Imagine how useful this list might become if
                      > SoBig.G happened upon it. Thanks for your efforts, Nathan.
                      >
                      > --Dan Morenus

                      For what it's worth, I am only one of 3 active moderators. I
                      appreciate the compliments, though I should point out that the
                      list had moderators before it was even hosted on yahoogroups,
                      and that I volunteered about a month ago.

                      Nathan
                    • Andy Swallow
                      Hi, Sounds good to me. My concerns were mainly over a fear of a time delay, such as that associated with the NumberTheory group. But those concerns have faded
                      Message 10 of 12 , Aug 29, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi,

                        Sounds good to me. My concerns were mainly over a fear of a time delay,
                        such as that associated with the NumberTheory group. But those concerns
                        have faded away... thankyou!

                        Andy


                        On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 02:30:03AM -0000, Ken Davis wrote:
                        > Hi,
                        > I believe this list is as unmoderated as practical.
                        > There are now multiple moderators on this list. (spread around the
                        > world to ensure minimal delay to new applicants).
                        > Up until now joining the list has been simple a matter of signing up.
                        > This has resulted (in recent weeks) in a number of new ids whose sole
                        > purpose was to send spam (mainly porn) to our list.
                        > I for one did not appreciate this.
                        > Our job (as I understand it) is to ensure that people joining the
                        > list (appear to be) real people interested in the subject of prime
                        > numbers.
                        > As for existing members, only two have their posts moderated.
                        > (and then only to ensure they don't stray to far off topic).
                        > All other member's posts arrive with no human intervention.
                        > Cheers
                        > Ken
                      • Chris Caldwell
                        Please excuse this slow response, I have been out of town for my parents 50th wedding anniversary. I hate to add to the success of Jon s latest troll but I
                        Message 11 of 12 , Sep 2, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Please excuse this slow response, I have been out of town for my parents'
                          50th wedding anniversary. I hate to add to the success of Jon's
                          latest troll but I feel I need to say that I back my moderators 100%

                          At 10:17 AM 8/29/2003 +0100, Jon Perry wrote:
                          >Why make such preposterous rules. Disucssions are informal, your rule sounds
                          >fascist.

                          Discussion are impossible unless the individuals adhere to rules.
                          Usually the rules do not need to be stated, but some individuals need
                          help. Most of us know not to shout, not to repeat the same statement
                          over and over again 30 times, not to keep making off topic statements.
                          Those that do these things (in person or on a list) are sick.

                          Fortunately, on this list, we only moderate two individuals; the other
                          500+ folks can control themselves. As do these two 95% and 99%
                          of the time respectively.

                          At 09:56 PM 8/29/2003 +0100, Andy Swallow wrote:
                          >I must say, I pretty much agree with Jon. Ok, there is (as far as I
                          >know) only a very small amount of genuine spam that comes to this list.
                          >And there are also some posts that are just badly thought rubbish. And
                          >yes, some of those posts are from Jon! But I much prefer to let people
                          >decide for themselves what is rubbish and what is not, without having to
                          >wait for the odd few moderators to give their mighty opinions.

                          This makes no sense. Again, this is an un-moderated list.
                          Jon is one of the two that is moderated because he is not
                          capable of doing it himself. Rather than moderate him, I'd
                          rather just limit him to three posts a day so he'd slow down
                          and think. But that is not currently a Yahoo option. If you
                          feel you get Jon's posts too slowly, ask him to copy you
                          as he posts.

                          Starting a few weeks ago folks need a moderators permission
                          to join (so I added more moderators to make this quick). But
                          that was just to stop the porn mail from robots joining the list
                          (and has worked so far).

                          At 10:17 AM 8/29/2003 +0100, Jon Perry wrote:
                          >Do we get to vote on a moderator? I personally enjoyed this list a lot more
                          >in the good old days of instant messages and no moderation.

                          No. But you can again enjoy those "good old days" by
                          controlling yourself. Most individuals on the list do not like
                          getting 20 posts in a day which have no prime number content
                          or have the same content endlessly repeated. Part of a
                          discussion involves listening. This is not a spam
                          channel. Moderating you has greatly reduce this problem.

                          At 03:48 PM 8/29/2003 -0400, Nathan Russell wrote:
                          >--On Friday, August 29, 2003 10:17:19 AM +0100 Jon Perry <perry@...> wrote:
                          >>Would you allow a post daring to suggest that you are not fit
                          >>to be a moderator?
                          >
                          >Yes. Note that I allowed this one. I see you copied this reply
                          >to Professor Caldwell. If he feels I am unfit to be a moderator,
                          >I'm sure he will act accordingly. Frankly, I would almost welcome
                          >the free time and absense of personal insults. I must say, though,
                          >that the discussion is drifting off topic. If it gets much further
                          >I would prefer it be confined to the three of us.

                          Nathan, feel free to cut off all such posts from Jon. Folks
                          that want to hear his complaints can go to the list web site
                          and use the search engine to get dozens of old ones.

                          As for Jon creating a list, he has. But he is here because of
                          the people on this list. If a spammer just mailed those that
                          wanted to hear from him, then he'd be out of business. So Jon
                          must stay here. In fact this last complaint was his most
                          successful troll in since we last reinstated moderation on him.

                          Chris.
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.