"Dee Randall" > wrote in message
...
> Does anyone know?
>
> Just now subscribing to this food newsgroup which has a lot of interesting
> postings - some newsgroups have digressed to unrelated and disturbing
> postings to the extent that they have 80%+ got away from their topic.
>
> But I am wondering if there are no moderators on all newsgroups to
persons
> to keep the unrelated "topics" off. Seems to me that there are other
> newsgroups that would be more appropriate. You may say, don't click on
> those posts. I usually don't. One thing you can do is try to remember
who
> responded to those unrelated topics and don't click on them again -- but
all
> won't want to exercise their brain in this manner - such a waste of time;
I
> agree.
>
> If a person's philosophy is an aside such as a postscript to their name,
> well, I'd say you can't do much about those persons except TRY not to
click
> on them again if it is not to your liking. But, I think this is a sneaky
way
> to get someone to listen to the person's propoganda that you wouldn't
> otherwise give them the time of day.
>

This group has no moderator. When a newsgroup is first formed it has a
charter that specifies, among other things, whether it is moderated or not.
Most are not - rec.food.recipes is one of the few that is, IIRC. So you
cannot just say "let's get a moderator for this group." Rather you would
have to start a new group, say rec.food.cooking.moderated, that is defined
as moderated from the start.


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.