Re: vacancy proposal - alt.religion.watchtower - convert vacant group to unmoderated

NightBulb.net <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 12/28/22 14:21, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>NightBulb.net <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>For your newsgroups file:
>>>alt.religion.watchtower 	Watchtower Society - Jehovah's Witnesses

>>>COMMENTS:

>>>The newsgroup (alt.religion.watchtower) was first established as a
>>>moderated group. See Message-ID <[email protected]>for
>>>information. The moderation of this group has been abandoned for a very
>>>long time. All moderation email addresses are defunct. Moderation is no
>>>longer necessary nor desirable.

>>>There is constant, ongoing discussion of the Watchtower Society in other
>>>alt.* groups that are off-topic. This group would provide a proper focal
>>>point for those unmoderated discussions.

>>>These off-topic discussions have continued for years unabated while the
>>>group founded for this very subject has been abandoned, dormant and
>>>inaccessible due to the moderation lock and absence of moderators.

>>>Removal of the moderation lock will permit these discussions to be
>>>separated into the group that was initially created for them.

>>>CHARTER:

>>>This formerly vacated group is re-activated for discussion and debate of
>>>the teaching, doctrine, activities, and news of the Watchtower Society,
>>>also known as Jehovah's Witnesses. Spam, commercial advertisements, and
>>>illegal activity are prohibited.

>>>{MODERATION POLICY: unmoderated}

>>Sorry, dude, but there's no way to force all the world's News
>>administrators to convert a moderated newsgroup to an unmoderated
>>newsgroup just by proposing it and sending a newgroup control message.
>>If any convert the group, you'll then have a mix of News sites with the
>>Moderation flag set to "yes" and others on which it's set to "no". That
>>makes a bad situation worse.

>>Please withdraw the proposal and do not send a newgroup message.

>>Find an appropriate existing unmoderated religion newsgroup in which to
>>hold your discussions.

>The newsgroup is inaccessible on all news servers at the moment because 
>the moderation is permanently broken. This means that no one is able to 
>post to it, at all, ever. How you can make that "worse" is by trolling 
>about it.

Wow. You came here for advice. I explained the reality of the situation
to you. You didn't hear what you wanted to hear, so you insulted me.

I will explain once more.

YOU don't run Usenet. News administrators do. YOU cannot order any News
administrator to change the moderation flag for this newsgroup on his
News server merely by sending a newgroup message. YOU certainly cannot
force all the world's remaining News administrators to act
simultaneously. Even if one News administrator acts on your request, no
user of a News server that has not changed the moderation flag will
receive article nor will he be able to post articles.

News administrators act upon user request. There is no user to request of
his News adminstrator to change the moderation flag on this newsgroup.
No user would even think to do that.

There is no audience to discuss this topic that has any interest in
reviving a moderated newsgroup whose moderator abandoned it. You cannot
communicate with anyone possibly interested in discussing the topic to
make such a reuqest.

Listen to me. There are many little used unmoderated religion
newsgroups. Choose one for your discussion and post there.

>. . . 

>I will eventually send a cmsg, after I have seen some responses from 
>server admins or someone from the Big8 acknowledges they are aware of 
>the request.

Ah. You've got your fingers in your ears. You didn't hear what you want
to hear and now you are throwing a tantrum. "You can't force me not to
send a newgroup message." Yeah, we know.

>Will a sysop please declare the group vacant? It is vacant. Then we can 
>move on.

You are an idiot. This is alt.*. The hierarchy is unadministered.
There is no such person as a "sysop" that declares a newsgroup vacant.