allenwe@microsoft.UUCP (Allen WELLS) (06/03/90)
GROUP I would like to formally begin a vote for the creation of a new group: talk.environment CHARTER This would be an unmoderated group to discuss issues related to the environment and the environmental movement. Some suitable topics would be: - how to start recycling programs - environmental events (Earth Day, etc) - environmentally conscious shopping - environmental politics (Clean Air Act, etc) - environmental innovations (GM Impact, etc) The group sci.environment would remain, but (hopefully) discussions there would relate more closely with its charter and discuss more scientific and technical topics. Some suitable topics would be technical discussions and studies on: - global warming - ozone depletion - ecosystems - pollution and its effects - research in recycling and new processes Note that discussions on the social, practical, and political implications of these should be moved to talk.environment. VOTING MECHANICS To vote on this proposal, e-mail a message to: microsoft!allenwe, or uw-beaver!microsoft!allenwe You should be able to simply reply to this posting. In the title of the message, put: talk.environment - YES, or talk.environment - NO Any vote e-mailed to me which is clear and unambiguous will be counted. Any vote that is unclear or conditional (I vote YES if ...) will be discarded. Each vote will be confirmed by e-mail individually, there will be no mass confirmations until the final tally. Any votes posted instead of mailed will be ignored. The deadline for this vote is June 17th. DISCUSSION - Group charter I saw almost no real discussion on the group charter, so I have left it the same as it was in the original Call for Discussion. The overwhelming response was that such a group is needed, so I am proceeding with the Call for Votes. - Group name During the discussion period, there was remarkably little dissention and disagreement. To be honest, I expected it to be much worse. It is my impression that talk.environment was considered the most appropriate name. Groups within the sci. heirarchy were considered inappropriate. Using politics or soc heriarchies were mentioned, but received no further support or comment. - 'Deuling proposals' John Moore and I both started proposals for an alternate .environment group. I originally proposed talk.environment, John proposed sci.environment.issues. John and I both believe that there was no difference in our proposed charters, just in the proposed name. John and I have had both private and public discussions, and came to the agreement that I should run the vote (my mailer is more reliable). Based on private e-mail he has received and public postings, John has agreed that talk.environment is the appropriate name to have the vote on. I have publicly offered to let John run the vote, he has publicly declined and asked me to run it. I thank John for his support. - Moderation of sci.environment It is my hope that talk.environment will be used as appropriate and the sci.environment group will be freed for the purpose it was intended. I honestly believe that the people presently posting there are doing so due to the lack of a more appropriate forum, not because they are trying to be disruptive. I think that we should create the discussion group, and encourage appropriate threads to migrate over there. If that doesn't work moderation of sci.environment might need to be considered, but I think that it is inappropriate to consider that now. A forum for environmental discussions is needed, regardless of the eventual moderation of sci.environment. -- ---------- "Here in Pennsylvania, people have a special kinship to zombies." Alien | - the Wall Street Journal ---------- Microsoft has its own opinions. These are all mine, but I share.
kja@cbnewsd.att.com (krista.j.anderson) (06/04/90)
<> <> In article <55019@microsoft.UUCP>, allenwe@microsoft.UUCP (Allen WELLS) writes: > I would like to formally begin a vote for the creation of a new group: > > talk.environment > > This would be an unmoderated group to discuss issues related to the > environment and the environmental movement. Some suitable topics would be: > - how to start recycling programs > - environmental events (Earth Day, etc) > - environmentally conscious shopping > - environmental politics (Clean Air Act, etc) > - environmental innovations (GM Impact, etc) Sounds good to me. BUT, why can't we call it soc.environment so that a) people who don't get talk groups could still participate, b) the new group still has a purpose other than flaming, i.e. some socially redeeming quality. -- Krista A. HONOR Our Neighbors' Origins and Rights!