Re: Young people peering

Liste des GroupesRevenir à ns nntp 
Sujet : Re: Young people peering
De : candycanearter07 (at) *nospam* candycanearter07.nomail.afraid (candycanearter07)
Groupes : news.software.nntp
Date : 23. Apr 2024, 18:30:08
Autres entêtes
Organisation : the-candyden-of-code
Message-ID : <v08nmg$1njn1$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
User-Agent : slrn/pre1.0.4-9 (Linux)
Russ Allbery <eagle@eyrie.org> wrote at 19:04 this Saturday (GMT):
Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> writes:
On 20.04.2024 um 17:42 Uhr The Bjornsdottirs - Lightning wrote:
>
When I come across Usenet admins, they cannot clearly say that they
will ban and filter anyone they come across committing harassment,
nor that they will institute a code of conduct which is actively
antifascist, because the values of the network are not actively
antifascist and in fact tend towards calling antifascists whiners.
>
This is something every newsmaster can decide himself.
>
Sort of.  The NNTP and netnews protocols have exceptionally poor support
for moderation compared to just about any other message board software,
since essentially everything else was designed after NNTP and netnews and
learned from its shortcomings.
>
You can insert an extremely heavy moderation step in front of all traffic
(but only for private groups or if you can reach an agreement with your
transitive peers), but the protocol is completely insecure, and while
there are patchwork solutions to that, you have to implement them
yourself.  Or you have to rely on filtering, which is a very poor
moderation strategy that requires endless arms races with people trying to
bypass it.
>
And all of the more advanced tools available in newer protocols simply
aren't there (for better or worse; Usenet people usually don't like most
of these, but people running other types of message board systems use them
heavily): migrating messages to different threads, closing threads, user
authentication and all the things that come with that such as poster bans
or pre-moderation for new users but not established users, etc.  About the
only thing you can do is delete the message off your server after the
fact, and the tools for doing that are very primitive.  You can simulate
some of this by writing a whole pile of custom software that sits in the
pre-moderation path, but now you've signed on for the project of writing a
moderation system from scratch.  The protocol and existing software base
are doing essentially nothing for you.
>
A lot of people prefer the Usenet model for various reasons, and that's
fine, that's something people can argue about.  But Usenet's moderation
and filtering facilities are staggeringly primitive, and if those are a
priority for you, Usenet is a bad technology choice and you should use
something else.


Well said.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Date Sujet#  Auteur
14 Apr 24 * Young people peering74The Doctor
14 Apr 24 +- Re: Young people peering1Marco Moock
14 Apr 24 +* Re: Young people peering5Retro Guy
14 Apr 24 i+* Re: Young people peering3Grant Taylor
14 Apr 24 ii`* Re: Young people peering2rek2 hispagatos
19 Apr 24 ii `- Re: Young people peering1dgold
15 Apr 24 i`- Re: Young people peering1SugarBug
14 Apr 24 +* Re: Young people peering3Stefan Ram
15 Apr 24 i`* Re: Young people peering2candycanearter07
15 Apr 24 i `- Re: Young people peering1The Doctor
15 Apr 24 +* Re: Young people peering3Niklas H
15 Apr 24 i+- Re: Young people peering1SugarBug
16 Apr 24 i`- Re: Young people peering1The Doctor
15 Apr 24 +* Re: Young people peering2John Levine
16 Apr 24 i`- Re: Young people peering1David Ritz
16 Apr 24 +* Re: Young people peering29Kyonshi
16 Apr 24 i+* Re: Young people peering24The Doctor
17 Apr 24 ii+* Re: Young people peering22Retro Guy
17 Apr 24 iii+* Re: Young people peering10Kyonshi
17 Apr 24 iiii+* Re: Young people peering3Retro Guy
17 Apr 24 iiiii`* Re: Young people peering2Marco Moock
17 Apr 24 iiiii `- Re: Young people peering1Retro Guy
17 Apr 24 iiii`* Re: Young people peering6The Doctor
17 Apr 24 iiii +* Re: Young people peering4Kyonshi
17 Apr 24 iiii i+* Re: Young people peering2SugarBug
18 Apr 24 iiii ii`- Re: Young people peering1rek2 hispagatos
17 Apr 24 iiii i`- Re: Young people peering1The Doctor
17 Apr 24 iiii `- Re: Young people peering1SugarBug
18 Apr 24 iii`* Re: Young people peering11candycanearter07
18 Apr 24 iii `* Re: Young people peering10Retro Guy
18 Apr 24 iii  `* Re: Young people peering9candycanearter07
18 Apr 24 iii   `* Re: Young people peering8Retro Guy
18 Apr 24 iii    +- Re: Young people peering1candycanearter07
18 Apr 24 iii    `* Re: Young people peering6Grant Taylor
18 Apr 24 iii     +* Re: Young people peering3Russ Allbery
19 Apr 24 iii     i`* Re: Young people peering2SugarBug
19 Apr 24 iii     i `- Re: Young people peering1Russ Allbery
19 Apr 24 iii     `* Re: Young people peering2Marco Moock
19 Apr 24 iii      `- Re: Young people peering1Grant Taylor
17 Apr 24 ii`- Re: Young people peering1Kyonshi
17 Apr 24 i`* Re: Young people peering4Stefan Ram
18 Apr 24 i `* Re: Young people peering3Kerr-Mudd, John
19 Apr 24 i  `* Re: Young people peering2Computer Nerd Kev
19 Apr 24 i   `- Re: Young people peering1Sn!pe
19 Apr 24 `* Re: Young people peering30The Bjornsdottirs - Lightning
19 Apr 24  `* Re: Young people peering29Grant Taylor
19 Apr 24   `* Re: Young people peering28Retro Guy
19 Apr 24    +* Re: Young people peering2Ted Heise
20 Apr 24    i`- Re: Young people peering1Ross Finlayson
20 Apr 24    +- Re: Young people peering1candycanearter07
20 Apr 24    `* Re: Young people peering24The Bjornsdottirs - Lightning
20 Apr 24     +* Re: Young people peering4Marco Moock
20 Apr 24     i`* Re: Young people peering3Russ Allbery
21 Apr 24     i +- Re: Young people peering1Ross Finlayson
23 Apr 24     i `- Re: Young people peering1candycanearter07
20 Apr 24     +* Re: Young people peering18Sn!pe
21 Apr 24     i`* [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile. (was Re: Young people peering)17The Bjornsdottirs - Lightning
21 Apr 24     i +* Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.14Sn!pe
21 Apr 24     i i+- Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.1The Bjornsdottirs - Lightning
21 Apr 24     i i+* Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.9Adam H. Kerman
21 Apr 24     i ii`* Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.8Sn!pe
21 Apr 24     i ii `* Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.7Marco Moock
21 Apr 24     i ii  +* Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.2Sn!pe
21 Apr 24     i ii  i`- Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.1D
21 Apr 24     i ii  `* Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.4Retro Guy
21 Apr 24     i ii   +- Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.1Sn!pe
21 Apr 24     i ii   `* Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.2Marco Moock
21 Apr 24     i ii    `- Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.1Adam H. Kerman
22 Apr 24     i i`* Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.3Imran Zukhova
22 Apr 24     i i +- Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.1Adam H. Kerman
22 Apr 24     i i `- Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile.1Mr Ön!on
21 Apr 24     i +- Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile. (was Re: Young people peering)1yeti
21 Apr 24     i `- Re: [OFFTOPIC] Censorship is good, actually. If you don't like that fact, maybe you should commit some client-side censorship, otherwise known as the killfile. (was Re: Young people peering)1Marco Moock
21 Apr 24     `- Re: Young people peering1yeti

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal