Does anyone moderate this group?

[[email protected]]

I'm guessing not, given the torrent of off-topic BS that floods this
group like an open sewer.

[Sander deWaal]

said:

>I'm guessing not, given the torrent of off-topic BS that floods this
>group like an open sewer.


We rely solely on self-moderating.

Actually, RAO is a long-term psychological testbed.
All responses are stored for future analyzing by anthropologists all
over the world.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

[George Middius]

said:

>I'm guessing not, given the torrent of off-topic BS that floods this
>group like an open sewer.

Since you've asked, the position of moderator is still open. The qualifications
for the job seem minimal to me, but we haven't yet been able to find a desirable
candidate.

If you're interested in applying, here are the attributes you should have:

1. Your collar must be suitably high and tight. This is essential in order to
muster up an attitude of smugness and scornfulness.

2. You need a loose definition of "on topic posting". This is because of the
yin-yang nature of RAO. If you believe that proselytizing about "tests" is
pertinent to audio opinions, you must also allow for vigorous mockery of the
twerps and 'borgs who promulgate that propaganda. If you believe that
dreamy-eyed adulation of ineffable sonic qualities is appropriate, you must also
set rules that allow for healthy skepticism toward such reports.

3. You must divorce yourself from any class allegiance. RAO is mostly populated
by people who enjoy music (and life), but there is a contingent of dour,
envy-ridden emotional cripples who bitch and moan about things they can't
afford. It wouldn't do for a moderator to dismiss these creatures in a cavalier
fashion because most of RAO already does that.


That's about it. Want to apply for the job? The rewards are, as they say, more
in the giving than in the receiving. <G>

[Schizoid Man]

wrote:

> I'm guessing not, given the torrent of off-topic BS that floods this
> group like an open sewer.

Congratulations on making your own contribution to this "off-topic BS".

[Robert Morein]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> I'm guessing not, given the torrent of off-topic BS that floods this
> group like an open sewer.
>

Warning: this post is off-topic for this group. Perjorative declarations
will not be tolerated in this group. Making a mockery of a sham of a sham of
a mockery is not allowed.

This is your first warning. A repeat will result in banning the poster from
r.a.o.

Sorta like McCarty says, "banned from usenet" :)

OFFICIAL RAO SHAM MODERATOR

[Clyde Slick]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> I'm guessing not, given the torrent of off-topic BS that floods this
> group like an open sewer.
>

and loving every minute of it.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Bret Ludwig]

No, moderated newsgroups must be created as such from their inception.
Rec.audio.high-end is a moderated group and lacks the harassment,
moronic name-calling, and general male adolescent behavior found on
r.a.o. The downside is that serious challenges to the status quo are
moderated out along with the abuse.

[[email protected]]

In article . com>,
"Bret Ludwig" > writes:
> No, moderated newsgroups must be created as such from their inception.
> Rec.audio.high-end is a moderated group and lacks the harassment,
> moronic name-calling, and general male adolescent behavior found on
> r.a.o. The downside is that serious challenges to the status quo are
> moderated out along with the abuse.

I have not seen anything that would make me think that "serious
challenges to the status quo are moderated out". Both sides of the
objectivist vs. subjectivist debate seem well represented to me.

[Bret Ludwig]

wrote:


> I have not seen anything that would make me think that "serious
> challenges to the status quo are moderated out". Both sides of the
> objectivist vs. subjectivist debate seem well represented to me.

I seem to recall there was a big issue over the moderators' rejection
of any advocacy of or methodology used for ABX testing. OTOH others
said it was essentially a religious freedom issue-fundies and Mormons
in effect do not have a right to preach in Catholic churches.

[Steven Sullivan]

Bret Ludwig > wrote:
> No, moderated newsgroups must be created as such from their inception.
> Rec.audio.high-end is a moderated group and lacks the harassment,
> moronic name-calling, and general male adolescent behavior found on
> r.a.o. The downside is that serious challenges to the status quo are
> moderated out along with the abuse.

The status quo there, as elsewhere in much of audiophile-land, includes
the objectivist vs. subjectivist debate. Both sides get ample airing
on RAHE, but they aren't allowed to wallow in the puerile rhetorical
depths that characterize RAO. Which means the S/N is *much* higher
there than here. And Middius hasn't ever gotten a post past the mods
on RAHE, AFAIK. Coincidence?

Anyone who wants more high S/N discussion of audio matters, should
browse www.hydrogenaudio.org.



--

-S
"You know what love really is? It's like you've swallowed a great big
secret. A warm wonderful secret that nobody else knows about." - 'Blame it
on Rio'

[George Middius]

Sulliborg tries some Kroologic.

>And Middius hasn't ever gotten a post past the mods
>on RAHE, AFAIK.

Liar. I've never had a post rejected on RAH-E.

[Steven Sullivan]

George Middius > wrote:


> Sulliborg tries some Kroologic.

> >And Middius hasn't ever gotten a post past the mods
> >on RAHE, AFAIK.

> Liar. I've never had a post rejected on RAH-E.


It's no lie at all: as far as I know (which is what
AFAIK means), you haven't ever gotten a post past the
mods at RAHE.

Could it be you've never tried to post there? If so,
why don't you say that?

If not, can you point me to one of your successful
RAHE posts? Google finds no posts authored by
a 'Middius' there. It find hundreds of them infesting
this newsgroup, though.



--

-S
"You know what love really is? It's like you've swallowed a great big
secret. A warm wonderful secret that nobody else knows about." - 'Blame it
on Rio'

[George Middius]

Sulliborg keeps on peddling his lies.

>> Sulliborg tries some Kroologic.

>> >And Middius hasn't ever gotten a post past the mods
>> >on RAHE, AFAIK.
>
>> Liar. I've never had a post rejected on RAH-E.

>It's no lie at all: as far as I know (which is what
>AFAIK means), you haven't ever gotten a post past the
>mods at RAHE.

I've "gotten past" every post I ever submitted, liar.

>Could it be you've never tried to post there? If so,
>why don't you say that?

If that's what you suspect, why did you invent that crap about "never got a post
past the moderators"? You're such a ****head. You put yourself on duh-Mikey's
level with stupidity like this.