jmi@devsim.mdcbbs.com ((JM Ivler) MDC - Douglas Aircraft Co. Long Beach, CA.) (10/25/89)
Enuf is Enuf.
From my understanding of the rules the following happens:
1) Topic is seggested and opened for discussion
2) Discussion commences and continues for a set period of time
3) Discussion ends
4) Topic is opened for a vote
5) Vote is taken by use of "E-MAIL" (read private)
6) Vote period ends
7) Vote results are announced with a listing of all who voted
pass = create the topic/newsgroup
fail = don't create the topic/newsgroup
If I didn't miss anything here, the logic of this is simple. Therefore I
request that those who are flaming on sci.aquaria stop it (since this is in
Phase V) and wait until the totals come out before they try to undermine it
with rec.aquaria .
All this flaming has done is create more work for my modem. I made my
determination and posted my vote (as I hope everyone has) without letting the
flaming determine what my vote would be. This vote is private and until Phase
VII it should stay that way.
----- Completly Different Issue -----
I also feel that any issue that requires a vote should have a feedback
mechinism that allows the vote taker to acknowledge that the vote was recv'd
and what it was tallied to. Additional information (like a pitch to change the
vote) should not be included! (this is not to insinuate that this has been done
in the past, it is a request that this should not be done in the future!)
--------------------------------------
The bottom line is; Flaming during the vote, or requesting reconsideration of a
posted vote is in *bad* taste (as is some of the language that was used on this
system as the sci.aquaria was being discussed) it has the flavor of politicians
getting too close to the polling places.
Although I would like to see sci.aquaria put to bed before discussion on
rec.aquaria, I don't see where one being in vote precludes the other from being
proposed and discussed. I believe that the "Open discussion" on rec.aquaria was
started in a childish manner (should have let the vote close on sci.aqauria
first) and it would be in the best interst of all net users if everything were
just pulled back and off the fires until the vote finished.
This is a user net, and I would hate to have to deregister this newsgroup due
to the lack of tact, style or grace that some (and it is a very few) users have
shown in the constant flames on a single topic. Like I said, enuf is enuf. Let's
just call it quits and see what the vote brings.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| J.M. Ivler | INTERNET: JMI@DEVSIM.MDCBBS.COM |
| McDonnell Douglas Corp. | UUCP Bang: UUCP!DEVSIM.MDCBBS.COM!JMI |
| Douglas Aircraft Co. |~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| 3855 Lakewood Blvd | VOICE: (213) 496-8727 |
| Mail-stop 36-49 |~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| Long Beach, CA 90846 | DECUServe and DCS available (IVLER) |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| DECUS - L&T SIG/ CASE and Tools Integration Working Group Chair |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Toolsmith (n) - a specialist in the manufacture of support softwaregary@dgcad.SV.DG.COM (Gary Bridgewater) (10/28/89)
In article <444.25449b5b@devsim.mdcbbs.com> jmi@devsim.mdcbbs.com ((JM Ivler) MDC - Douglas Aircraft Co. Long Beach, CA.) writes: >Enuf is Enuf. > ... >This is a user net, and I would hate to have to deregister this newsgroup due >to the lack of tact, style or grace that some (and it is a very few) users have >shown in the constant flames on a single topic. Like I said, enuf is enuf. Let's >just call it quits and see what the vote brings. and, In article <193@ark1.nswc.navy.mil> Dave Sill <dsill@relay.nswc.navy.mil> writes: > ... >Really, now that sci.aquaria is up for a vote, how about giving it a >break? and, I say "Right On! Knock it Off." This discussion has been the most disgusting, counter-productive nonsense I've seen since I unsubscribed to rec.unhumor. If we need to discuss new groups then let's do it with a sense that this is a service and that limiting the number or kind of groups could also be a service while, on the other hand, if enough users are interested, then a new group is appropriate even though YOU may not read it. Let the vote decide. These personal attacks are totally non-persuasive and the cuteness of savaging someone over a semi-public medium has worn so thin as to be invisible. It is the moral equivalent of scribbling "Joe S***KS" on a freeway overpass with a spray paint can. So let it end, and if you cannot then the solution is a moderated discussion group to match the moderated announcement group. As a news admin, I feel that I should read this group to keep abreast of what is happening. I Do Not feel that I should have to wade through 50 or 60 puerile natterings or 20 or 30 cross posted articles about which I couldn't care less or go into a daze with all the creative subject lines designed to foil my carefully crafted KILL file. And, I think other news admins probably agree - I'll bet at least 100 of them do, anyway. If they haven't unsubscribed. -- Gary Bridgewater, Data General Corp., Sunnyvale Ca. gary@sv4.ceo.sv.dg.com or {amdahl,aeras,amdcad,mas1,matra3}!dgcad.SV.DG.COM!gary No good deed goes unpunished.