Nat Value wrote:
>> >moderation works in that all posts to bionet.microbiology will have to
> >be screened manually for content by the moderators before they appear
> >on the web. While not fool-proof, this will lead to a reduction of
> >unrelated or unsuitable messages, such as spam. A few newsgroups have
> >moderation status. The advantages are that one has to deal with less
> >unrelated posts, the disadvantages are that moderation will cause a
> >delay in the message appearing on the net.
>> Though I understand the need some newsgroups have for moderation, I truly do
> not believe this is one of them. Yes, I've seen some spam here. But, overall,
> there is just not enough traffic in this newsgroup to warrant all the work it
> would take, I believe. When you've got, say, 500 posts a day, and 450 of them
> are spam, definately - moderate. But the most I've seen here are no less than
> say 40 posts a day, maybe 5 of which are spam.
>
I must admit that I tend to agree with you. Anyone doubting this should
take a look at some of the more "interesting and unusual" messages on
sci.bio.technology!
Lelsey Robertson
