In message , Simon Brooke 
<stillyet+nntp@googlemail.com> writes
>On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:32:39 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> On 26/10/09 13:15, Simon Brooke wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:55:24 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:
>>>
>>>> The effect it to make whitelisted
>>>> posters appear to be more valuable contributors.
>>>
>>> Tough! That is not our problem.
>>
>> At the moment it's not a problem for me either, I don't subscribe to
>> non-moderated groups, and the only moderated lists I use are
>> announce-only lists.
>>
>> But I'm interested to see how well new created moderated groups are
>> working, and what effect they are having on existing non-moderated
>> groups - actual or perceived cliquism included.
>
>Claims of cliquism are inevitable, and not something which I believe we
>should be unduly concerned about. If the moderated group attracts lively
>and friendly discussion, it's bound to develop into a group of friends,
>anyway, even if it didn't start that way.

And anyway, there a number of groups including URC, where the accusation 
of cliquism is has been slung about anyway.
-- 
Chris French