Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!amdcad!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!apple!voder!tolerant!jane
From: jane@tolerant.UUCP (Jane Medefesser)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Let's think about moderation, news admins.
Message-ID: <2748@tolerant.UUCP>
Date: 26 Sep 88 17:33:06 GMT
References: <194@amgraf.UUCP> <5622@killer.DALLAS.TX.US>
Reply-To: jane@tolerant.UUCP (Jane Medefesser)
Distribution: na
Organization: Slobbering Systems, Inc.
Lines: 34

In article <5622@killer.DALLAS.TX.US> (Bill Wisner) writes:
>>	news	usenet, newsadmin, root	
>>	comp	newsadmin ellen, tomk, ... \
>>		(and more)
>>	gnu	...
>
>No need to bastardize the news sources further.
>
>#define FASCIST and put this in your authorized file.
>
>usenet:news.all
>newsadmin:news.all,comp.all
>root:news.all
>ellen:comp.all
>tomk:comp.all
>wisner:all,all.all

Bear in mind that a lot of news installations - like this one - are not 
administered by the System Admin department, but by an individual from
another department who has voluntered to do so because the sysadmins are 
just too busy.

With this in mind, can you imagine what a can of worms could develop if
everyone were required to maitain an "authorized" file?  I for one have no
idea from day to day when a new user is added to the system, and even when
I AM aware, I can't determine whether or not that person will be a news
reader. Our /etc/password file currently has about 250 user entrys because
we don't delete old accounts (we inactivate the password). This would be
a really difficult thing to administer here and at other sites like this.

Again, I support moderation - and I like the idea a previous poster made
about renaming news.admin to news.newsadmin (or something like that) to
make a more clear distinction between the NEWS administration group and the
SYSTEM administration group.