restarting comp.newprod, comp.simulation and comp.std.announce

[Cross-posting to news:comp.std.misc , as suggested in
news:vs73t3$3hlga$2@dont-email.me , but setting Followup-To:
news:comp.misc , as the former group doesn't seem to be active.]

As some might know, back in March I've volunteered to take over
moderation of comp.newprod and comp.std.announce newsgroups
that are currently unusable due to the lack of a moderator.
(My news.groups.proposals post is in the References:.)

In my post I also suggested for comp.simulation (and a few other
non-comp.* groups) to become unmoderated.  I don't seem to see
any response to that, so assuming the intent is still to remove
it, I'm volunteering to take over its moderation as well.

Like I've mentioned, I've never had much interest in moderated
newsgroups before, much less been a moderator of one, so I can't
promise smooth operation, especially right from the start.

And regardless, I'd prefer not doing the thing entirely on my
own; anyone here interested in taking part, perchance?

My plan is to set up message submission email addresses aliased
to my own mailbox, and approve (or not approve) them from there.
Should there ever be any co-moderators, I'd move submissions to
a password-protected portion of an https: website and provide
an HTTP/1-based API (usable with curl(1) and compatible with
Lynx, naturally) to approve the messages there.

It's possible that I'd implement a whitelist of known-good
posters for auto-approval, though that will require a way for
the software to /identify/ such posters.  Such as, e. g., a
direct email message (Newsgroups: and all) to the submission
address, with a valid DKIM signature for the MAIL FROM: domain.

There're scarcely any mention of the groups at hand under
http://ftp.isc.org/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/comp/
(they might've been created outside of the Big-8 practices
employed today): comp.windows.x.i386unix and comp.lsi.testing
mention news:comp.newprod and news:comp.simulation ,
respectively, while comp.remove-former-inet lists .std.announce
among the groups proposed for deletion, though the group was
kept in the end.

My intent for the groups is to, obviously, keep them on-topic.
Other than that, I'm going to check for what IETF / IESG
announcement lists are around here and, if fitting, start
forwarding messages from there to comp.std.announce.

My secondary objective would be to keep the groups reasonably
low-traffic, limiting the number of posts (so to save the
readers from pressing "next, please" too many times, etc.)
rather their cumulative size (data transfer is cheap these
days, though my MX /does/ have rather tight message size
limits.)  In particular, I might, on occasion, ask users to
repost their handful of articles of few lines each as a single
larger one.

Should any of the groups attract too much traffic (as unlikely
as it is to happen), I'd be proposing some sort of quality
guidelines, and, once those are enacted, start rejecting
articles failing to meet them.

By the by, I'd appreciate Message-Id:s of whatever periodic
postings that were seen there.  A cursory web search didn't
reveal much to go by, and as the groups might've been created
outside of the Big-8 process, there's no charter on file for
them, either.

That'd be all for now.  Thoughts?