🚀 go-pugleaf

simon@darkmere.gen.nz (Simon Lyall) writes:

> *if* you must post this sort of stuuf it would be a better idea to 
> summarize your cancels like others do. A huge dump of your mail file 
> doesn't do anyone any good.

The cancels are summarised. I was told that wasn't good enough.
It was one-off and the volume is still lower than what might have been
in spool anyway from the originals. I regret any inconvenience caused. I
didn't want to post it.

> However that doesn't change the point that the charter of nz.general is 
> broad and inclusive, cancels should be few and far between and confined 
> to such stuff as binaries/450k junks articles and ads etc. Not that 
> everybody even agrees those should be cancelled. 

I don't think there is even justification for cancelling 450K junks is
there? I mean, not from the nz.* hierarchy FAQ.

Note that cancels I issued are confined to just the cases you list above,
with one exception:
  whenever a highly cross-posted thread goes way off topic, and several
  responsible people from different newsgroups complain and this has no
  effect and the thread stays objectively irrelevant to the majority of
  newsgroups and no effort is made to restore relevance, and newsgroups
  are not trimmed or follow-ups set appropriately, then that thread will
  also be targeted.

In case anyone thinks this is a specific description of the aus.politics and
gun thread, then note that these conditions have been met twice before.

Now if there is a clear consensus that the conditions I outline above are
not acceptable for taking active action at redirecting (not censoring) the
debate to relevant forums, then I'm happy to accept that.

> >> No. One of the reasons I am making my little contribution is to try and
> >> precent cancelbots being introduced. They lack the discretion of human
> >> beings; there are some cases where cross-posting to nz.wanted and nz.gener
> >> is (currently) acceptable. I have pleaded with some people that
> >> education is the answer, rather than automatic eliminations. Their respons
> >> was prove it. So I am trying.
> 
> Um, where and when was this exactly?

This was not a public discussion. The people I know were just so fed up
with ads (mainly) in nz.general that they were just going to unleash their
bots without public discussion.

> options. On the other hand Wayne seems to have pulled this cancel idea 
> out of a hat.

That is correct.



--
system@codeworks.gen.nz  Wayne McDougall ICHTHUS <*> Impeach President Clark!!
        A U C K L A N D   D E B A T I N G   A S S O C I A T I O N   (Inc)
Interested in debating, public speaking or adjudicating in Auckland?
Send me email or write to President@ada.org.nz, or ADA, P O Box 3233, Auckland