Re: PROPOSAL: Vote on FAQ Revision

From: tim@leaphome.demon.co.uk (Tim Franklin)

Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0000

Greg Lindahl (lindahl@pbm.com) wrote:
 > wish@pcug.com writes:

> > However Greg seems to think that stating that the vote is a violation of
 > > USENET tradition is an adequate response and doesn't seem to want to explain
 > > why that tradition is a good thing.

> I didn't invent Usenet Tradition. It's not up to me to defend it.  I
 > would like you thank you for presenting the case for it.

> It should also be noted that the traditional criteria for a vote
 > passing on Usenet are 100 more yes than no votes, and more than 2/3s
 > yes. By that standard, the previous vote didn't attract enough
 > attention to succeed.

By that standard the vote probably *cannot* succeed.  I doubt, from the
recurring names in the debate so far, that there are anywhere near 100
people in total who care enough about the issue to vote.

The '100 more votes' standard is intended to prevent newsgroups with a
highly limited audience from being formed, as these have a resource cost
to all news servers.  For a change in the policy of an existing group, ie
zero impact on anyone outside of the group, a simple two-thirds majority
should be sufficient.

I agree though, a properly conducted email vote is the correct way to
deal the issue.

Tim.

--
Tim Franklin        tim@leaphome.demon.co.uk              Powered by
                    http://www.pelican.org/~tim                Linux

References

Re: PROPOSAL: Vote on FAQ Revision
wish@pcug.com
Thu, 17 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0000