Re: 3rd RfD: Mass-deletion of moderated groups without a moderator

In article <87ikodda8j.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>,
Keith Thompson  <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:

Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> writes:

On 12/03/2025 22:28, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 12/03/2025 22:12, Keith Thompson wrote:

D Finnigan <dog_cow@macgui.com> writes:
[...]

This group could be a candidate for an MVI. When's the last time there
was an MVI for comp.lang.c.moderated?

>
I had to look it up: an MVI is a Moderator Vacancy Investigation.
There's no need for an investigation.
>
I've been exchanging emails with the previous moderator.

Been there; done that; how d'you like the t-shirt?
 

He's too
busy to take up moderation duties again, but he still has the
account and is willing to hand it off.  We've also been discussing
it in comp.lang.c.  One user in comp.lang.c has expressed interest
in having comp.lang.c.moderated revived as an active newsgroup.
Several others have not necessarily advocated reviving it, but
would participate if it were revived (I'm in that category myself).

If the group were actively (i.e. promptly) moderated, I too would be
in that category.
 

It's likely that one or more people would be willing to serve as
co-moderators (nobody has volunteered to take on 100% of moderation
duties).

Count me in for 4½%. I think Tim would be willing, too.

>
Does c.l.c have so much off-topic traffic that a c.l.c-moderated is
really necessary?

>
comp.lang.c does have a lot of off-topic traffic.  I personally don't
think that reviving comp.lang.c.moderated would be a good solution to
that.  My personal preference would be for clcmod to remain the way it
is: an inactive newsgroup whose old articles are still available on NNTP
servers with sufficiently long memories.

Surely most news servers that carried it have long-ago expired
all of the articles that they received that were posted to it.

There may be a handful with exceptionally long memories, but
would those honor an rmgroup for it, anyway?

One way to do that would be
just to leave it out of the proposed mass-deletion.  Another would be
for a new moderator to take over but not approve any posts, perhaps with
an email auto-responder to let any posters know what's going on.
>
But I'm open to seeing clcmod revived if there's enough demand, and
perhaps helping out somehow.

I remember when c.l.c.m was newgrouped; it was done to deal with
the huge influx of noise due to new users who hadn't been versed
in netiquette.  Those days are past, and not coming back, so the
original motivation for it is gone.

Leaving it existant but unuseable (since no one can post to it)
just on the off chance that there exists a server somewhere that
both has articles that had been posted to it in the past and
would delete those if the group were removed seems fragile and
not likely to be useful, long term.

However, it doesn't make a lot of sense to make it UNmoderated,
given the name.  My 2c is either find a new moderator or team of
moderators, or remove it.

- Dan C.