Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead .....PLEASE

[M0FMT <m0fmt@yahoo.co.uk>]

Chris

 

So long as you think like me and agree with me then you can have all the democracy you want!

 

73 es GL Pete M0FMT IO91UX

From: Chris <c.ashby435@btinternet.com>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sent: Saturday, 26 May 2012, 14:39
Subject: Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead .....PLEASE

This is EXACTLY why I say NO.
Chris, G4AYT.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steinar Aanesland" <saanes@broadpark.no>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 9:58 PM
Subject: Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead .....PLEASE



hummm..an option to ban someone. I think I vote for yahoo too ;)

LA5VNA S


Den 24.05.2012 21:55, skrev Clemens Paul:
> >Do what you like but leave me OUT
> >G3KEV
>
> I vote for yahoo.)
>
> 73
> Clemens
> DL4RAJ
>
>
>
>
>    ----- Original Message -----
>    From: mal hamilton
>    To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
>    Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 9:17 PM
>    Subject: Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead .....PLEASE
>    A moderator !!!!!!!!!!!!! or a censor !!!!!!!!!! and if you have
an opinion that differs from others you should be BANNED.
>    No discussion, no debate in other words a DICTORSHIP, hardly
democratic.
>    What next ???????????
>    I can manage without any of it and get on with amateur radio and
experimentation. These past few days without the reflector has not
hindered my amateur radio activities and I do not need to be vetted by
others !!
>    Do what you like but leave me OUT
>    G3KEV
>
>
>        ----- Original Message -----
>        From: Alberto di Bene
>        To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
>        Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 5:17 PM
>        Subject: Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead .....PLEASE
>        On 5/24/2012 6:33 PM, g3zjo wrote:
>>        Why not go for it and start it yourself.
>>        We know some will not move so it will be an additional
facility. Please make sure it is has no taboo, f
>>        frequencies, modes, opinions, or subjects rules, and no
childish sulking.
>        Another suggestion is to not make it an open group, meaning
that each request for membership should be
>        accompanied by a very short introductory message explaining
why that membership is requested.
>        Then the moderator(s) of the group will decide whether to
accept it or not.  I suppose the same is done
>        presently with the Majordomo mailer.
>
>        And, if that introductory message is convincing, but up to a
point... then the moderator can accept the individual,
>        but putting him in moderation status, meaning that every
message from him must be examined by the moderator(s)
>        before being published.  The moderation status can be removed
after a couple of legitimate messages from the guy,
>        showing that he is not a troll or spammer.
>
>        I use this method on my soft_radio  Yahoo group
>        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/soft_radio/
>        with more than 2300 subscribers, and, if memory serves, I had
just a couple of cases where a spam message
>        got through in more than 8 years of the existence of that group.
>
>        73  Alberto  I2PHD
>
>    E-Mail ist virenfrei.
>    Von AVG überprüft - www.avg.de
>    Version: 2012.0.2176 / Virendatenbank: 2425/5019 - Ausgabedatum:
24.05.2012
>