[aus.comms] CALL FOR DISCUSSION: Create sci.compression?

ross@spam.ua.oz.au (Ross Williams) (02/09/91)

CALL FOR DISCUSSION about the possible creation of a new newsgroup

   sci.compression

which would be used to carry discussions on

   DATA COMPRESSION

Proposal:"That a newsgroup be created as follows:

   Name    : sci.compression
   Charter : Discussions about data compression.
   Unmoderated."

In accordance with  the guidelines for newgroup creation  which I have
included below, discussion about the creation of such a newsgroup will
take place in news.groups.

I have  posted this to  a selection  of newsgroups, readers  of whom I
suspect might be interested. Apologies to those groups whose charter I
have misjudged. If you think of a  group that you think I have missed,
roll a pair of  dice and if after that many  days, someone else hasn't
reposted this there, please do it yourself.

Ross Williams
ross@spam.ua.oz.au

PS:

My opinion: As far  as I can tell, a newsgroup  on data compression is
warranted. The field of data compression and its followers seems to be
growing  quite  fast.  At  present,   compressor  heads  hang  out  in
comp.theory,  sci.crypt, and  other  tangential  newsgroups. So  let's
create  a  special  newsgroup  for   data  compression  and  give  the
compressor heads (such as myself) a happy home.

My main  concern is what the  new group should be  called. I orginally
thought that  comp.compression would  be best, but  as crypt  which is
closely related, is sci.crypt and not comp.crypt I thought it would be
best    as   sci.compression.    Maybe    even    better   would    be
sci.data.compression, but then you  might as well have sci.data.crypt.
So sci.compression  is the best I  can think of and  don't anyone even
dare  suggesting  sci.comp -  that  would  be  far too  confusing  for
everyone. I know I'm a compressor head, but I draw the line at names!

As for the unmoderation of my proposal,  I say see how it goes. If the
group becomes cluttered  with people asking where they can  get a copy
of Huffman  coding in  BASIC, we can  slam in a  moderator at  a later
date.

Below is "the  rules" for group creation which you  might like to read
if you want  to get involved with  all this. If you don't  want to get
involved, but you want the newsgroup to exist, at least keep your eyes
open for the call for votes and vote when the time comes.

Ross.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Original-from: woods@ncar.ucar.edu (Greg Woods)
[Most recent change: 06 Sep 1990 by lear@turbo.bio.net (Eliot Lear)]

      GUIDELINES FOR USENET GROUP CREATION

REQUIREMENTS FOR GROUP CREATION:

   These are guidelines that have been generally agreed upon across
USENET as appropriate for following in the creating of new newsgroups in
the "standard" USENET newsgroup hierarchy. They are NOT intended as
guidelines for setting USENET policy other than group creations, and they
are not intended to apply to "alternate" or local news hierarchies. The
part of the namespace affected is comp, news, sci, misc, soc, talk, rec,
which are the most widely-distributed areas of the USENET hierarchy.
   Any group creation request which follows these guidelines to a
successful result should be honored, and any request which fails to
follow these procedures or to obtain a successful result from doing so
should be dropped, except under extraordinary circumstances.  The
reason these are called guidelines and not absolute rules is that it is
not possible to predict in advance what "extraordinary circumstances"
are or how they might arise.
   It should be pointed out here that, as always, the decision whether or not
to create a newsgroup on a given machine rests with the administrator of that
machine. These guidelines are intended merely as an aid in making those
decisions.


The Discussion

1) A call for discussion on creation of a new newsgroup should be posted
   to news.announce.newgroups, and also to any other groups or mailing lists
   at all related to the proposed topic if desired. This group is moderated,
   and The Followup-to: header will be set so that the actual discussion takes
   place only in news.groups. Users on sites which have difficulty posting
   to moderated groups may mail submissions intended for
   news.announce.newgroups to "announce-newgroups@turbo.bio.net".

2) The name and charter of the proposed group and whether it will be moderated
   or unmoderated (and if the former, who the moderator(s) will be) should be
   determined during the discussion period. If there is no general agreement
   on these points among the proponents of a new group at the end of 30 days
   of discussion, the discussion should be taken offline (into mail instead of
   news.groups) and the proponents should iron out the details among
   themselves.  Once that is done, a new, more specific proposal may be made,
   going back to step 1) above.

The Vote

1) AFTER the discussion period, if it has been determined that a new group is
   really desired, a name and charter are agreed upon, and it has been
   determined whether the group will be moderated and if so who will
   moderate it, a call for votes may be posted to news.announce.newgroups and
   any other groups or mailing lists that the original call for discussion
   might have been posted to. There should be minimal delay between the
   end of the discussion period and the issuing of a call for votes.
   The call for votes should include clear instructions for how to cast
   a vote. It must be as clearly explained and as easy to do to cast a
   vote for creation as against it, and vice versa.  It is explicitly
   permitted to set up two separate addresses to mail yes and no votes
   to provided that they are on the same machine, to set up an address
   different than that the article was posted from to mail votes to, or
   to just accept replies to the call for votes article, as long as it
   is clearly and explicitly stated in the call for votes article how
   to cast a vote.  If two addresses are used for a vote, the reply
   address must process and accept both yes and no votes OR reject
   them both.

2) The voting period should last for at least 21 days and no more than 31
   days, no matter what the preliminary results of the vote are. The exact
   date that the voting period will end should be stated in the call for
   votes. Only votes that arrive on the vote-taker's machine prior to this
   date may be counted.

3) A couple of repeats of the call for votes may be posted during the vote,
   provided that they contain similar clear, unbiased instructions for
   casting a vote as the original, and provided that it is really a repeat
   of the call for votes on the SAME proposal (see #5 below). Partial vote
   results should NOT be included; only a statement of the specific new
   group proposal, that a vote is in progress on it, and how to cast a vote.
   It is permitted to post a "mass acknowledgement" in which all the names
   of those from whom votes have been received are posted, as long as no
   indication is made of which way anybody voted until the voting period
   is officially over.

4) ONLY votes MAILED to the vote-taker will count. Votes posted to the net
   for any reason (including inability to get mail to the vote-taker) and
   proxy votes (such as having a mailing list maintainer claim a vote for
   each member of the list) may not be counted.

5) Votes may not be transferred to other, similar proposals. A vote shall
   count only for the EXACT proposal that it is a response to. In particular,
   a vote for or against a newsgroup under one name shall NOT be counted as
   a vote for or against a newsgroup with a different name or charter,
   a different moderated/unmoderated status or (if moderated) a different
   moderator or set of moderators.

6) Votes MUST be explicit; they should be of the form "I vote for the
   group foo.bar as proposed" or "I vote against the group foo.bar
   as proposed". The wording doesn't have to be exact, it just needs to
   be unambiguous. In particular, statements of the form "I would vote
   for this group if..." should be considered comments only and not
   counted as votes.

The Result

1) At the completion of the voting period, the vote taker must post the
   vote tally and the E-mail addresses and (if available) names of the votes
   received to news.announce.newgroups and any other groups or mailing lists
   to which the original call for votes was posted. The tally should include
   a statement of which way each voter voted so that the results can be
   verified.

2) AFTER the vote result is posted, there will be a 5 day waiting period,
   beginning when the voting results actually appear in
   news.announce.newgroups, during which the net will have a chance to
   correct any errors in the voter list or the voting procedure.

3) AFTER the waiting period, and if there were no serious objections that might
   invalidate the vote, and if 100 more valid YES/create votes are received
   than NO/don't create AND at least 2/3 of the total number of valid votes
   received are in favor of creation, a newgroup control message may be sent
   out.  If the 100 vote margin or 2/3 percentage is not met, the group should
   not be created.

   The newgroup message may be sent by the vote-taker (if able to do so)
   or by the system administrator on the vote-taker's machine. If this
   option is not available, then the vote-taker should send mail to
   "newgroup@ncar.ucar.edu" saying that a successful vote has been run
   and requesting that a newgroup message be sent. DO NOT send the vote
   results; we can look those up in news.announce.newgroups if we haven't seen
   them there already. In any case, please send mail to Gene Spafford
   (spaf@purdue.edu) informing him of a successful vote, so he can add the
   new group to the official list of groups which he maintains.
----------------------------------------------------------------------