On 2009-08-18, Peter J Ross wrote:

> Which parts of "at best" and "at worst" were difficult for all of you
> to understand?
>
> Maybe I expressed myself unclearly.
>
> At best you have two newsgroups where one would suffice. 

Cf. uk.legal and uk.legal.moderated?  Both thrive (but ULM has less
noise and no spam).

> At worst you have two spamtraps.

If they both turn into spamtraps, they can be removed later (or the
better servers will just stop carrying them).

> I repeat what I've said before: the natural consequence of this RFD
> is the eventual removal of URC.

Maybe, maybe not.  If it works out that way, fine.  But it's really of
no concern to people who are not interested in discussing the group's
topic on the USENET.  (I don't mean "Mind your own $^$^* business!"
--- I mean "I don't see why you should care, and I don't think you
should vote against it.")

AIUI, uk.religion.christian was converted from unmoderated to
moderated some years ago without a "parallel group" stage (someone
who's more familiar with the history, please correct me if this is
wrong) and is now a successful group.

Adding the moderated group (according to this proposal) keeps more
options open for the future.