A Request For Discussion (RFD) for a new usenet group,
'comp.compilers.unmoderated', will be posted in the near future. As
part of this process, it will be necessary to get some feedback from
users of related groups as to the desirability, or otherwise, of
creating a new group. This group is intended to be an unmoderated
version of the existing 'comp.compilers' group.
The rationale for the RFD is that the moderated group has a high
posting latency (which is currently an average of 3.5 days), and that
this makes it impossible to use the group in an 'interactive' manner.
A single Q/A cycle currently takes, on average, over 5 days, and can
occasionally be considerably longer (if, for example, the moderator is
on holiday). The posting latency has increased steadily over the
years, rising from an average of 1.4 days in 1996, to 3.5 days in
2005.
Our concern at this stage is to determine whether or not the existing,
or potential, reader****p of comp.compilers is adversely affected by
the latency issue. If you have any opinions on this matter, and
whether an unmoderated group would better serve the reader****p, please
reply to this message, with your concerns or opinions.
------------------------------------------------
PLEASE REPLY ONLY TO COMP.COMPILERS.TOOLS.PCCTS.
------------------------------------------------
Some concerns have already been raised, which I have briefly covered
below:
(1) It would be more usual to use the names 'comp.compilers' and
'comp.compilers.moderated' for an unmoderated and a moderated group,
respectively. However, this change would require the consent of the
c.c moderator, who is not in favor of an unmoderated group.
(2) An unmoderated group would, of course, have its share of
irrelevant and spam postings; whether or not this is a significant
issue will be a matter of personal opinion. However, it should be
noted that the c.c moderation policy requires that posters use
verifiable email addresses, which are displayed in cleartext. It could
be argued that this policy simply moves the burden of spam from the
group to the individual posters themselves.
Finally, it should be noted that the RFD does not, in any way, reduce
the usefulness or utility of c.c itself. Anyone who would prefer to
post to a moderated group will still have that option.
|
