Text 2318, 130 rader
Skriven 2004-11-29 11:22:00 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
   Kommentar till text 2250 av Philip Lozier (1:267/169)
Ärende: Moderating
==================
Hello Phil,

 >>> I currently have 792 going through the BBS, and am adding
 >
 >  MvdV> And how many of those have real flow?
 >
 > 398 at the moment... I turand more popping into the tosser
 > as I go... I turned on 792 a week ago, and 398 are
 > producing traffic.

Real traffic or just automated postings? (As we see in many areas these days)

 >  MvdV> While I can see that with the advent of TelNet f.e. a
 >  MvdV> Russian user could just as easily pick up a Russian echo
 >  MvdV> from you as from a local BBS, I still don't see why he
 >  MvdV> would. What is the added value for /him/?

 > The -real- point of it here, maybe I phrased it wrong or
 > didn't include it previously, is that where I am from,
 > there is a vast combination of ethnic groups.

All within the range of a local call....

[..]

 > So, you see, I could have an audience on my BBS of English
 > speaking people of heritage other than from here, who may
 > find it to be all the tits to be able to log onto a BBS
 > like this, participate in the other BBS activities ina
 > language they do understand, yet also be able to easily
 > communicate with people fromtheir native lands (or that of
 > their parents or grandparents), in a variety of topics.

Ah, yes now I see. You want to provide for the local community. That makes
sense. Some sense anyway.

 > In an area such as mine, a true example of "the great
 > melting pot" and "E Pluribus Unum" (or however you spell
 > it(?), the opportunity and means are available to present
 > FidoNet, and REPresent FidoNet, as I feel it should be...
 > an INTERNATIONAL messaging network, and to do any less on
 > my part, IMO, would be stupid on my part.  I think it would
 > be an attraction for the BBS for these types of people, and
 > I think it would be truly a reflection of the capabilities
 > of FidoNet in its supposedly obsolete technology.

I admire your enthousiasm. My idea would be that immigrants interested in
electronic communication with people of their country of origin have already
found the means long ago.

A Russian in New York can telnet to a Russian BBS just as easily as he can
telnet to yours. So why would he?

Unless of course he depends on POTS. But how many people in New York that have
a computer and have a modem do not have InterNet access?

 > That's just how I feel about it anyway.

Well I hope that you are right. Please keep us posted as to how many users
these non English areas attracts.

 >>> in echoes in these languages, never mind be able to keep
 >>> track of who on my BBS posts what in them.  The concept is
 >>> ludicrous.

 >  MvdV> Then why do you want to carry these echos? How are you
 >  MvdV> going to check if a moderator request is justified?

 > Good question... it can be done however. I think that the
 > chance of there being a real problem over a user though are
 > slim to none however.  I only see that kind of thing
 > happening in the SysOp and like areas.

Perhaps you are right. No use crossing the bridge before you stand before it.

 > Suffice to say, if I get a netmail in a language I do not
 > understand, I can assume there is likely a problem, and I
 > can always run the text through a translator...

An automatic translator? Oh boy....

 > even if it comes out rough, I wll get the idea.

Or the wrong idea. I would not trust an automatic translator as a basis for my
decison making.

 >>> The areas are there for potential BBS users
 >>> that may find them useful.  If a moderator has a problem
 >>> with what somebody on the board posts, it is up to -them-
 >>> to contact -me- and let me handle it on my end,

 >  MvdV> What if the moderator does not speak English? There is a
 >  MvdV> fair chance that will happen in a non English echo....

 > Read above.

Given that the sysop is responsible for the traffic he puts into the FidoNet
bit stream, I would be a bit reluctant carrying an echo that I can't read.
But... it is your system....

 >>> complaint is warranted, I will deal with the user, not to
 >>> mention the issue of who the -moderator- actually is, on a
 >>> common sense basis.

 >  MvdV> I can see a more likely outcome. The moderator is unable
 >  MvdV> to communicate with you because he does not speak English
 >  MvdV> well enough and so puts in his rues that the distribution
 >  MvdV> is to be limited to those who can speak his language. He
 >  MvdV> has your feed cut.

 > Then I post publicly the narrow mindedness of that moderator,

Where? In his echo? In a language that he can not read? What is that going to
accomplish?

 > and not being able to take measures forcommunication, since
 > it -can- be achieved.

It would not impress me. If I - as a moderator - were to run into a serious
problem with a user on a BBS where I can not directly communicate with te sysop
and the sysop is unable to live up to his responsibility because the sysop does
not speak the language of the echo that he carries, my POV would be that he
should not carry the echo.

I hope you never run into that problem.

Cheers, Michiel

--- InterMail 2.50
 * Origin: If privacy is outlawed, only outlaws have privacy. (2:280/5555)