edhew@xenitec.on.ca (Ed Hew) (11/19/89)
In article <452.2562b158@devsim.mdcbbs.com> jmi@devsim.mdcbbs.com ((JM Ivler) MDC - Douglas Aircraft Co. Long Beach, CA.) writes: >In article <4199@nigel.udel.EDU> berryh@udel.edu (John Berryhill) writes: >> I can't believe the number of people that believe that campaigning and >> canvassing for votes is "dishonest." > >Your so right. Working at DAC we have about 35 different systems that can >access the NET and NEWS. Next time I will send out local mail to all the users >that I know about (about 500 engineers) and request that they vote the way I >want them to on some newsgroups creation. > >**Come on, be real!!** Solicitations of non-NEWS reader votes runs contrary to >the basic foundation of the why this vote is being taken in the first place. <more topical text used to live here> Perhaps this is simply another valid point as to why newsadmins should be the only ones voting on newgroup creations. They are the only ones on any given site that do know who really reads a given group, and in most cases will be the least biased. On: Mon, 13 Nov 89 07:10:55 GMT, I had written: eah> Subject: Re: Some observations on this whole mess. eah> Date: Mon, 13 Nov 89 07:10:55 GMT eah> Message-ID: <1989Nov13.071055.9401@xenitec.on.ca> eah> Summary: perhaps only newsadmins should vote? eah> eah> ....and on the topic of wild ideas.... eah> Perhaps each newsadmin would accept opinions from his/her news readers eah> and then issue one single "vote" for that site. As it is quite true eah> that the size of USENET is growing almost exponentially, each newsadmin eah> in effect acting on his own user poll would serve to temper the flood eah> of weighted opinion from individual sites (there were some complaints eah> re. this point recently). eah> eah> Would one vote per site be viable? The more I read in news.groups, the less wild this seems. >| INTERNET: jmi@devsim.mdcbbs.com | UUCP: uunet!mdcbbs!devsim.mdcbbs!jmi | Ed. A. Hew Authorized Technical Trainer Xeni/Con Corporation work: edhew@xenicon.uucp -or- ..!{uunet!}utai!lsuc!xenicon!edhew ->home: edhew@xenitec.on.ca -or- ..!{uunet!}watmath!xenitec!edhew
karen@everexn.uucp (Karen Valentino) (11/25/89)
edhew@xenitec.on.ca (Ed Hew) writes: >Perhaps this is simply another valid point as to why newsadmins should be >the only ones voting on newgroup creations. They are the only ones on any >given site that do know who really reads a given group, and in most cases >will be the least biased. One of the least appetizing ideas I've read lately. What am I, the faithful user of Usenet--an idiot who can't think for myself? What is happening to *my vote*? This goes against the commonly held notion (and I'm of the mind that it truly *is* a notion) that Usenet is an anarchy, and should remain that way. This is another example of government by representation, not by consensus. If we're going to start the process of changing Usenet in so profound a manner, it should be an *explicit* process, and agreement to do so should by reached by consensus. I'm hoping that there are others out there who are alarmed at the suggestions to let others do our voting for us. I think it's pretty ironic that us "anarchists" are starting to move in the direction of government by representation--a Naming Committee, and now an electoral college. Blech. I feel my power in the group creation process ebbing by the minute. Karen -- Karen Valentino <> Everex North (Everex Systems) <> Sebastopol, CA ..pacbell!mslbrb!everexn!karen "Something there is that doesn't love a wall." Robert Frost