|
|
|
Appeal (another) against URCM moderation decision (on Re: cycling
improves driving..)
Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:55:51 +0000
A sub-thread on speed limits had developed when a poster replied to just
one of the points made in an earlier on-topic post in the thread "Re:
cycling improves driving.." - a point about speed limits.
I would be very interested to hear the moderators' opinions on this
sequence, particularly on why my post[1], ...
|
Appeal against moderation decision (Was Re: cycling improves driving..)
Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:05:45 +0000
Hello,
I'd like to appeal against the moderation decision to reject the
following post in uk.rec.cycling.moderated.
Posts containing just accusations against myself (and others) were
allowed containing no cycling content. However my post where I try to
explain the relevance of my comments is rejected.
Pos ...
|
Re: To celebrate the new group
Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:20:33 +0000
In message <7knqokF38gn2fU2@mid.individual.net>, Simon Brooke
<stillyet+nntp@googlemail.com> writes
>On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:32:39 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> On 26/10/09 13:15, Simon Brooke wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:55:24 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:
>>>
>>>> The effect it to make whitelisted
>>>> p ...
|
Re: To celebrate the new group
Tue, 27 Oct 2009 05:40:38 -0500
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:32:39 +0000,
Andy Burns <usenet.aug2009@adslpipe.co.uk> wrote:
> On 26/10/09 13:15, Simon Brooke wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:55:24 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:
>>
>>> The effect it to make whitelisted
>>> posters appear to be more valuable contributors.
>>
>> Tough! That ...
|
Re: To celebrate the new group
27 Oct 2009 08:53:40 GMT
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:32:39 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:
> On 26/10/09 13:15, Simon Brooke wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:55:24 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:
>>
>>> The effect it to make whitelisted
>>> posters appear to be more valuable contributors.
>>
>> Tough! That is not our problem.
>
> At the moment i ...
|
Comments invited wrt this post to uk.rec.cycling.moderated "Re: 3feet2Pass
- No. 10 petition"
Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:50:57 +0000
This post with the subject line: "Re: 3feet2Pass - No. 10 petition" was
posted by me to ukrm at 23:18 on Sunday evening.
At 12:07 this afternoon it was rejected by a moderator as "needlessly
inflammatory", with the additional moderator comment:
'I have explained the answers to the questions you are asking here ...
|
Re: To celebrate the new group
Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:41:12 +0000
In message <9dcbe5dijm95pp1cn5088viii53jf7l846@4ax.com>, Tom Crispin
<kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> writes
>On 26 Oct 2009 13:37:04 GMT, Simon Brooke
><stillyet+nntp@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>>I am opposed to providing any details of who may be on the blacklist. If
>>we do that it will just provide the ...
|
Re: Appeal of rejected post to uk.rec.cycling.moderated
Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:59:45 +0000
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:02:54 +0000, Chris French
<newsgrp@familyfrench.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <saramerriman-A2BB40.08221726102009@news.individual.net>,
>Sara Merriman <saramerriman@blueyonder.co.uk> writes
>>In article <e2iae55oj7jm85bndfj92ko9l9e5telg9g@4ax.com>,
>> Tom Crispin <kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk ...
|
Re: To celebrate the new group
26 Oct 2009 20:51:03 GMT
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:38:15 +0000, Jim A wrote:
> jms wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:03:49 +0000, Jim A
> <ja@averyjim.myzen.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>jms wrote:
>>>> It is appalling that a person can be black-listed and they
> are
>>>not
>>>> told why.
>>>
>>>If done properly, anyone finding themse ...
|
Re: Appeal of rejected post to uk.rec.cycling.moderated
Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:07:02 +0000
In message <7kmcecF394j97U2@mid.individual.net>, at 19:43:08 on Mon, 26
Oct 2009, Simon Brooke <stillyet+nntp@googlemail.com> wibbled
>On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:37:19 +0000, Tom Crispin wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:35:07 +0000, Pedt <"\"@
>> @\""@some.oddities-etc.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>You appear to be sugges ...
|
|
|
