XPost: news.groups, rec.arts.comics.dc.universe, rec.arts.sf.tv   
   XPost: rec.arts.tv   
   From: kalelfan@yanospamhoo.com   
      
   "A B"  wrote in message news:4d20df2e$0$2510$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk...   
      
   > It's not easy getting posters together for a new group.   It would work   
   > just as well, on a small scale, to do as Steve suggests and set up a   
   > moderated companion to an existing group.   
      
   It's not the current OM concept.  You weren't around for the earlier   
   discussion in news.groups.proposals, but by the end of that it was   
   apparent that the ad-hoc approach of moderating an existing group   
   would be counterproductive and it's just not something that I'm   
   interested in.  See also my response to the catpandaddy post a few   
   days ago.  Here's another reason:   
      
   > And it'll have to be on a small scale at first, because it's hard   
   > finding moderators.   
      
   That's a different issue and there's even a potentially much   
   better approach that hasn't been discussed, involving mainly   
   a robo-moderated / self-moderated whitelist.  It would require   
   perhaps only three moderators for the entire om.tv and any   
   other division.  But it will be easier to find the moderators, and   
   the new posters, in a Big Picture Vision that a new hierarachy   
   would represent.  You aren't asking them to come into an old   
   hornet's nest where 15% or whatever are dead-set against it.   
      
   People are more likely to see the new hierarchy as a New   
   Usenet Frontier, which is exactly what OM is.  They wouldn't   
   even have to know the word "Usenet" at all.  That can just as   
   easily be transparent, with a new hierarchy and 16 topics like   
   those I listed.  Click that broadly-defined topic and you're in   
   on worldwide discussion of it.  Old Usenet participants from   
   dozens if not hundreds of groups can join in, but so can the   
   web board and mailing list participants and so on, because   
   OM addresses the cesspool barrier and signal to noise.   
      
   So that's the vision, and the idea of focusing exclusively on   
   rec.arts.tv and existing groups makes no sense.  Even as a   
   pilot project it makes no sense because 95%+ of the growth   
   for OM is beyond those who have stuck around to this point.   
   Just because the most numb, die-hard, cesspool immune   
   Usenet bunch (i.e., all of us left, pretty much) might not be   
   interested doesn't alter or address Usenet's Decline.   
      
   If Usenet were a TV show on CBS, they'd have cancelled it   
   in 2002 or so.  We're like the 3:00 a.m. infomercials now...   
   in Topeka!  Although I must say I was utterly astonished   
   when Whiskers posted the URL to the news.individual.net   
   page with their 2005 announcement that they'd be charging   
   a modest annual fee (10 Euros, works out to about $15 US   
   or Canadian these days).  They cite, and again this is 2005,   
   250,000 users that they'd registered for the free service.   
      
   So even allowing for "Yes, but..." explanation of that huge   
   number, maybe we're actually still like Detroit and not just   
   Topeka.  :-)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)