wtwolfe@hubcap.UUCP (Bill Wolfe) (02/13/89)
Voting with regard to the proposed comp.sw.components newsgroup has been completed. The totals were: 29 in favor, 13 opposed (30 in favor, if my own vote is included). Since there must be 100 more yes votes than no votes, a new comp.sw.components mailing list is being formed. Everyone who voted in favor of the newsgroup is automatically a member of the mailing list, and has already been mailed the welcome message. If you did not vote in favor of the newsgroup, but would like to be on the mailing list, send me e-mail and I will add you to the mailing list. Persons posting articles relating to software components in comp.* will generally be notified of the existence of this mailing list. In future votes on the creation of a comp.sw.components newsgroup, everyone on the mailing list will automatically count as a YES vote. Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (02/16/89)
In article <4402@hubcap.UUCP>, wtwolfe@hubcap.UUCP (Bill Wolfe) writes: > In future votes on the creation of a comp.sw.components newsgroup, > everyone on the mailing list will automatically count as a YES vote. I would like to join the mailing list, but I may not wish to vote YES to the newsgroup. I would strongly urge this assumption that members of a mailing list wish to vote YES to the group be dropped. -- Peter da Silva, Xenix Support, Ferranti International Controls Corporation. Work: uunet.uu.net!ficc!peter, peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. `-_-' Home: bigtex!texbell!sugar!peter, peter@sugar.uu.net. 'U` Opinions may not represent the policies of FICC or the Xenix Support group.
billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe,2847,) (02/17/89)
From article <3111@ficc.uu.net>, by peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva): > In article <4402@hubcap.UUCP>, wtwolfe@hubcap.UUCP (Bill Wolfe) writes: >> In future votes on the creation of a comp.sw.components newsgroup, >> everyone on the mailing list will automatically count as a YES vote. > > I would like to join the mailing list, but I may not wish to vote YES to > the newsgroup. I would strongly urge this assumption that members of a > mailing list wish to vote YES to the group be dropped. There appears to be a general lifecycle of mailing list -> newsgroup; it is my understanding that the mailing list is counted as a block of "YES" votes when such a transition is being considered. At present, (requests are still coming in) there have been 3 drops and 45 adds, bringing the total strength of the group to 75. The requirement for newsgroup creation is that there be 100 more "YES" votes than "NO" votes, and I think we can safely assume that this condition will be satisfied by the end of the year... Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu comp.sw.components Mailing List administrator
wsmith@m.cs.uiuc.edu (02/18/89)
>/* Written 7:16 pm Feb 16, 1989 by billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu in m.cs.uiuc.edu:comp.software-eng */ >From article <3111@ficc.uu.net>, by peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva): >> In article <4402@hubcap.UUCP>, wtwolfe@hubcap.UUCP (Bill Wolfe) writes: >>> In future votes on the creation of a comp.sw.components newsgroup, >>> everyone on the mailing list will automatically count as a YES vote. >> >> I would like to join the mailing list, but I may not wish to vote YES to >> the newsgroup. I would strongly urge this assumption that members of a >> mailing list wish to vote YES to the group be dropped. > > There appears to be a general lifecycle of mailing list -> newsgroup; > it is my understanding that the mailing list is counted as a block of > "YES" votes when such a transition is being considered. Why not just write the rules as you see fit? There is a procedure for creating a notes file. "Implicit votes" are not part of the procedure. I think there are plenty of mailing lists with > 100 members that have not intention of becoming a notesfile and their organizers would agree that it would be inappropriate for them to be a notesfile. It is not such a great inconvenience to *ask* the people on the mailing list, when it becomes time to consider promoting the mailing list in the future. As Peter said, assuming that all of the people reading want it to be a news group is an invalid assumption. I think that the issue for becoming a new notes file is not only the number of readers, but also the traffic. If the traffic is light, using mail will be more efficient, regardless of how many people read the mailing list. Turn down C2H2/oxygen mixture.... Bill Smith wsmith@cs.uiuc.edu uiucdcs!wsmith
PLS@cup.portal.com (Paul L Schauble) (02/18/89)
Sorry to bother the net with this, but the clemson mailer doesn't recognize billwolf. Bill, please add me to the mailing list. ++PLS
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (02/23/89)
In article <4455@hubcap.UUCP>, billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe,2847,) writes: > There appears to be a general lifecycle of mailing list -> newsgroup; Often true, but not always. > it is my understanding that the mailing list is counted as a block of > "YES" votes when such a transition is being considered. Not so. I am currently running the vote for comp.unix.i386. I suppose I could have included the entire complement of the existing mailing list, but that would be unethical. Some people prefer the mailing-list format, you know. -- Peter da Silva, Xenix Support, Ferranti International Controls Corporation. Work: uunet.uu.net!ficc!peter, peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. `-_-' Home: bigtex!texbell!sugar!peter, peter@sugar.uu.net. 'U` People have opinions. Companies have policy. And typos are my own business.
jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) (02/23/89)
In article <3176@ficc.uu.net>, peter@ficc.uu.net (Alexina's dad) writes: > In article <4455@hubcap.UUCP>, billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe,2847,) writes: > > > it is my understanding that the mailing list is counted as a block of > > "YES" votes when such a transition is being considered. > > Not so. I am currently running the vote for comp.unix.i386. I suppose I could > have included the entire complement of the existing mailing list, but that > would be unethical. Here, here! Peter is ABSOLUTELY right. Casting a vote in someone's name w/o that individual's permission is *extremely* unethical --- and startlingly presumptuous. Can you imagine, in those States where voters list party affiliation when registering, if all those who registered as Democratic, Republican, or Libertarian were automatically listed as having voted a straight ticket for their respective parties? Or as having voted a certain way on referenda? Is there a way to preclude such permissionless autovoting on the net? If so, I urge adoption of that device -- even tho I personally will vote yes on just about any newsgroup, I *don't* want someone doing so in my name. Jeff Daiell Hmmm -- one advantage to the autovoting in public elections, tho. There are several states where Independents outnumber partisan registrations. If those States would adopt the None Of The Above option, and autovote Independents as NOTA votes ... {|8^)] -- IN CASE OF EMERGENCY EVACUATION, REMEMBER THE TIME-HONORED RULE: WOMEN AND CHILDREN AND TECH AIDES FIRST.