VOTE: voting continues on comp.unix.wizards

VOTE: voting continues on comp.unix.wizards

Post by John F. Haugh » Fri, 19 Oct 1990 21:26:54



Hi.  Two weeks ago a vote was announced in comp.unix.internals
on the question of re-creating comp.unix.wizards.  You will
recall that comp.unix.wizards was removed, and replaced with
a wealth of other newsgroups.

There have been several questions and complaints since the
vote was originally called, and I'd like to take this time
at middle point of the vote to remind everyone the vote is
still going on, and to answer some of the questions.

1). What is this vote for?  Didn't we just have a vote?
    Yes, we just had a vote, and many people were dissatisfied
    with the outcome.  Many of those people think the old
    .wizards group should be restored, so this vote will
    give those people a chance to have their voices heard.

2). What is going to happen to these new groups?
    Nothing.  The new groups have their purpose, and they will
    stay just the way they are.  This vote only affects the
    existence of comp.unix.wizards, and does not remove any
    other groups.

3). Why didn't this get posted in news.groups?  Isn't that a
    requirement?
    The guidelines only suggest that news.groups be included,
    as well as other "relevant" newsgroups.  Since news.groups
    is not related to the subject of UNIX programming, and
    since it is typically such a high-noise newsgroup, I felt
    news.groups was an inappropriate newsgroup.  This is
    permitted by the guidelines and has allowed this decision
    to be made by the users of comp.unix, rather than a group
    of uninvolved bystanders.  Many people disagree, and they
    have posted articles in news.groups on the subject of this
    vote.  So the issue is being covered in news.groups even
    without my posting a formal "Call For Votes" there.

4). Where do I send "NO" votes?
    You send your "NO" votes to the same place as your "YES"

    You may put anything you wish in the vote, so long as the
    meaning is clear.  Profane language will not be tolerated,
    however, so please keep your votes clean.

5). Wouldn't it be better if it was a moderated group?
    Perhaps, but I'm not holding a vote on that question.
    Many people have expressed the opinion that .wizards should
    be moderated, and I have come to agree with them.  I
    offered to stop this vote should a moderator with known
    credentials step forward, and so far none has.  That offer
    still stands.

6). When does the vote end?
    November 3rd, one month after the start of the vote.

7). What are we going to do about inappropriate and inaccurate
    postings?
    Troublesome postings have been with us for years, and
    creating 1,000 new groups will not reduce the number of
    such postings.  We can only hope that the users of
    comp.unix.wizards will be professional enough to ignore
    postings which they find "inappropriate" and to not answer
    postings which they aren't qualified to answer.
--
John F. Haugh II                             UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh

"SCCS, the source motel!  Programs check in and never check out!"
                -- Ken Thompson

 
 
 

VOTE: voting continues on comp.unix.wizards

Post by Ed McGui » Sat, 20 Oct 1990 02:49:21



Quote:> 3). Why didn't this get posted in news.groups?  Isn't that a
>     requirement?
>     The guidelines only suggest that news.groups be included,
>     as well as other "relevant" newsgroups.  Since news.groups
>     is not related to the subject of UNIX programming, and
>     since it is typically such a high-noise newsgroup, I felt
>     news.groups was an inappropriate newsgroup.

You are a liar.  The guidelines make no mention of posting a call for
votes to news.groups.  The only group mentioned specifically is the
moderated group news.announce.newgroups.  It is a low noise, low volume
group.

The basic information for all USENET users, regularly posted to
news.announce.newusers, includes "Introduction to news.announce".  That
article tells every USENET reader that news.announce.newgroups exists
solely to announce creation or consideration of new newsgroups, and
that all calls for votes and discussions, all vote results, and all
creation notices should be posted there.  Sysops do not have time to
read every special interest group.  The news.announce groups are there
for a reason.

Public announcement of a vote where sysops can see it is a basic
responsibility which you have abrogated.  Your attempt to spread
misinformation in order to justify your error is contemptible.  I
refuse to dignify your campaign with a vote.

Ed

 
 
 

VOTE: voting continues on comp.unix.wizards

Post by Eliot Le » Sat, 20 Oct 1990 07:51:57


Just so that there is no misunderstanding, on the whole Mr. Haugh's
vote does NOT follow the guidelines for newsgroup creation.
--
Eliot Lear

 
 
 

VOTE: voting continues on comp.unix.wizards

Post by Laird J. He » Mon, 22 Oct 1990 18:04:27


Quote:>Just so that there is no misunderstanding, on the whole Mr. Haugh's
>vote does NOT follow the guidelines for newsgroup creation.

Just so there is an understanding, I asked Eliot in mail a while ago if I
should draft a  Call For Votes, to which the response was to await this vote.
I have mentioned this twice in news.groups and it has not been contradicted.

Thus, the moderator seems to abide the vote itself while being highly
critical of its promulgation.  I agree on the second point, and will go
along with the first assuming that the vote can have a meaningful result.

"on the whole" above could mean that absent a proper Call we can have a vote
but not exactly know what the results should mean, since there is no proposed
charter.  However, in this case there was a perfectly good charter already
which can fill the gap handily.

The Guidelines _have_ been followed to a tee, but the "T" came at the start
of the voting rather than near the end when it is more customary to bend a
rule or two.  The Guidelines' spirit  was being ignored rather more baldly
when just before this Vote was called for "my version of the Guidelines is
better than your version" and "I called for this discussion and I am not
going to let anyone call for its vote" started being bandied about.

So, as they say here in Chicago, Vote Early, Vote Often!

--
My .signature is on vacation ------------- like me!

 
 
 

1. VOTE:>call for votes comp.unix.wizards

[Oh goody, here we go again.]

John,

you're wrong again. Please admit it. Take the floggings. Post an apology,
please for all of our sakes. You did not follow the guidelines, and it's
becoming increasingly annoying(to me, in *my opinion*) to even see your name in
this group. Even I admit when I'm wrong, ask my users, and friends!!!!

Many of us who run sites, even if you post a call for votes that
follows the guidelines, will not vote for your proposal. Many more of us will
completely ignore a newgroups message from you. Therefore, your
attempts could only possibly be successful, and at that, only in a few sites.

If the wizards who started this many moons ago would like to start a
call for votes(and the "wizards" are a known entity), then and only
then will I pay attention to any further discussions on this topic. Period.

Erik Fair's message from last week still stands. Erik is the moderator
for the email list, and many more folks will pay attention to him, than
you...

best regards(you're now in my KILL file

---->>RIP Stevie Ray Vaughan 1954-1990 You Will Be *Missed*<<----

--
Steven C. Blair         Network Operations Center
SynOptics Communications Inc. Mountain View, California


---->>RIP Stevie Ray Vaughan 1954-1990 You Will Be *Missed*<<----

2. I need help with a Macintosh PowerBook 145B

3. comp.unix.wizards comp.lang.c comp.sys.sun alt.unix.wizards alt.unix.wizards.free

4. Good Reason To Use Linux instead of Windows

5. comp.sys.hp comp.sys.sgi comp.sys.sun comp.unix.ultrix comp.unix.wizards

6. shared libraries under AIX-4.2 once again

7. alt.unix.wizard, alt.unix.wizard.free, comp.unix.admin

8. HELP: I'm losing my LAN access after starting PPP

9. Why you should not vote NO for comp.unix.bsd.openbsd

10. FINAL CALL TO VOTE comp.unix.sco

11. Second request for votes on comp.unix.sys5 (long)

12. CALL FOR VOTES: REPLACE comp.unix.internals

13. First Call for Votes comp.unix.sco