XPost: news.groups, rec.arts.comics.dc.universe, rec.arts.sf.tv   
   XPost: rec.arts.tv   
   From: cpd@cat.pan.net   
      
   "KalElFan"  wrote in message   
   news:8o7v1jFp77U1@mid.individual.net...   
   >   
   > While it could be done that way, it's a different version of OM.   
   > The best version is one where the lo-mod is actually where all   
   > the moderation takes place.  For each post, the first step for   
   > the human moderator is to decide whether to accept a post   
   > for lo-mod.  Remember, the post is already sitting in the no-   
   > mod version at this point.  The only question is does it get in   
   > to the lo-mod feed.  If yes, then there's really only one more   
   > step in the entire process and that's to tag the post with any   
   > tags that apply.   
   >   
   > These may be tags that assist the user in tailoring their filtering,   
   > or they may be hi-mod rejection tags, or both.  Examples of both   
   > might include UPA for Usenet Performance Art or Trolling, OT for   
   > off-topic, the META tag for a special kind of off-topic and so on.   
   > What these tags do is make the hi-mod version or view decision   
   > automatic, because the hi-mod rejection tags are what it's based   
   > on.  So all the moderation basically takes place at the lo-mod   
   > level in two steps: bag it and tag it.  That's it, and as good posters   
   > learn the process and tag the posts themselves it can run even   
   > more smoothly.   
      
   Isn't all of this already accomplished with killfile rules on a good   
   newsreader?  People can already choose what to filter out by their own   
   preferences, so I don't see how adding "tags" does anything except create   
   more work for the admins.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)