As we will not require potential posters to sign an application form indicating their PC or PL position, moderation judgements will be based on the content of the posts, rather than the source - the person or organization submitting the posting.

On the whole the default position for a posting is that it will be passed (whether or not the moderator happens to agree with the opinions expressed in the posting, or with the poster in general) as long as it does not fall foul of one or more of the following points.

THINGS TO CONSIDER

• does the post fit within the charter rules? Is there a clear section and point which could be used to justify "rejecting" a post? Cite the infraction.
• does the post sound negatively judgemental and/or denigrating?
• does the post appear more like moral diatribe, or does it appear reasonable and logical? Does it border on emotional ranting and raving?
• does it contain abusive language?
• is the topic relevant to this newsgroup? Ie. points 1.a-d of the charter?
• is the post overly long with reposted material to which no comment is provided? ie. a one-line answer to a 300 line reposted message?
• are attributions relatively easy to follow?
• does it contain spam, binaries, personal insults, flames?
• is it a cross-posting from other newsgroups? Or does this post attempt to cross-post to other newsgroups?

Note: Since it is impossible to cover every eventuality in this list, and since at the end of the day the moderator needs to use their judgement for postings not apparently or clearly covered directly in the list, this list should not be considered exhaustive, and may be amended and updated from time to time. It is merely a guide as to the overall 'tone' for postings to the newsgroup.

APPEALS PROCESS FOR 'REJECTED' POSTS:

• If a post is rejected, cite the infraction, and return to sender.
• The sender then has the option to conform to the cited infraction and make changes to re-apply. Or, the sender can choose not to re-post at all.
• If the sender feels they have been accidentally or unfairly prevented from posting, an appeal can be made in the following manner:
  • Repost the 'offending' article, with the title MODERATION APPEAL, and in the body of the posting put a copy of the problem message (with full header if possible) plus a copy of any rejection notice received from the moderation team. The moderator dealing with postings at the time will review the posting and apparent rejection reason(s) and either pass it this time (with a note to the poster explaining the situation), or reject it again with a fuller explanation of the reason.
  • if that fails, repost as before but this time with the title APPEALS COMMITTEE and the moderators as a whole will look into the problem and try to find a satisfactory solution. The committee members will vote on the issue and will inform the sender of the outcome. This decision will be binding.
  • in the event the committee's vote is tied, the committee's chair will make a binding decision.

Note: The moderator committee will rotate its members on an approximately monthly basis for the "chair" position and the occupant of the position will be identified as such.