[ Followups in email unless you feel it would be of public interest
  here.]

kanze@us-es.sel.de (James Kanze US/ESC 60/3/141 #40763) writes:
> But I would also like to be able to follow a technical thread once in
> a while without it immediately degrading into idiocy.  Flemings
> technique of immediately responding to almost anything has just about
> made this impossible.

Yes. However, when it's just one person making a ruckus, on most sites
it's easy to killfile them and responses to them. In trn,

/jim.fleming@bytes.com/fcK:j
/^References: .*@News1.mcs.com/cK:j

should set things up permanently to avoid Jim and responses to him, if
that's what you want.

> I suspect that as the net widens, there will be more and more
> Flemings.  With the result that all of the groups in which sound
> technical discussions are valued will end up moderated.  (I hope I'm
> wrong, though.)

I hope that's wrong too. IMO moderation is a tool that is much better at
supporting a pre-existing well-defined focus (EG announcement groups)
than for reducing general noise.

        Tom

>   In trn,
>
> /jim.fleming@bytes.com/fcK:j
> /^References: .*@News1.mcs.com/cK:j
>
> should set things up permanently to avoid Jim and responses to him, if
> that's what you want.

Many thanks ... that's just what I needed!!  (A bit esoteric, though.)


> > I suspect that as the net widens, there will be more and more
> > Flemings.  With the result that all of the groups in which sound
> > technical discussions are valued will end up moderated.  (I hope I'm
> > wrong, though.)
>
> I hope that's wrong too. IMO moderation is a tool that is much better at
> supporting a pre-existing well-defined focus (EG announcement groups)
> than for reducing general noise.

Right, what may be needed is some sort of "admission ticket needed"
group membership, not moderation.  I'm sure a PGP hacker could arrange
that messages not authenticated appropriately don't pass the access
control tests needed to be posted in a particular group (or at least,
use such criteria in personal viewer filters).

Such groups would not be the USENET groups that we know and (sometimes)
love, but it'd be a way to get rid of much of the uninformed commentary
that I'm not alone in needing to avoid.  I think we need different social
structures than we're using today.  Perhaps a meritocracy would be right
in many technical newsgroups, for at least part of their lifespans.

(And where's the place to debate such issues?  Comp.std.c++ doesn't seem
like it should be the best place to do so ... )

--
David Brownell                        db@Eng.Sun.COM.
Enterprise Distributed Objects

main(a){printf(a,34,a="main(a){printf(a,34,a=%c%s%c,34);}",34);}