RESULT : Remove unmoderated newsgroup uk.media.newspapers FAILS 9:14

[Pedt Scragg]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----


RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES

Summary: Remove unmoderated newsgroup uk.media.newspapers

Remove unmoderated newsgroup uk.media.newspapers FAILS 9:14

NO beat YES by a majority of 5 votes. For a removal proposal to succeed
there must be 12 more YES votes than NO votes. Accordingly, the proposal
FAILS.

=====================================================================

Voting closed at 23:59:59 BST, 9th July 2012.

Proponent : Paul Cummins
<paulcummins [AT] tiscali <DOT> co <DOT> uk>

Votetaker: Pedt Scragg
<query [AT] fairfieldtowers [DOT] net>

=====================================================================

Distribution:

uk.net.news.announce
uk.net.news.config
uk.media.newspapers

=====================================================================

The Results:

The results follow below in the following order:

1) Summary of Mail Received During the Voting Period
2) Results
3) Individual Vote Details
4) Votetaker Comments
5) Voting and Appeal Guidelines
6) Rationale
7) Newsgroups Line
8) Charter

=====================================================================

SUMMARY OF MAIL RECEIVED DURING THE VOTING PERIOD

31 emails were received at the ballot request address:

30 : Valid ballot requests
1 : Test by the votetaker


28 emails were received at the vote submission address:

25 : Valid votes
1 : Vote received out of time
1 : Accidental email by the votetaker
1 : Test by the votetaker

=====================================================================

RESULTS:

Remove unmoderated newsgroup uk.media.newspapers

YES : 9 votes
NO : 14 votes
ABSTAIN : 2 votes
-------------------
Total : 25 votes

NO beat YES by a majority of 5 votes. For a removal proposal to succeed
there must be 12 more YES votes than NO votes. Accordingly, the proposal
FAILS.

=====================================================================

INDIVIDUAL VOTE DETAILS

Voted YES:

Alan Lee alan # darkroom ? plus ? com Y
Barry Salter barry # southie ? me ? uk Y
crn crn # netunix ? com Y
Graham Drabble graham # drabble ? me ? uk Y
Judith Smith jmsmith2011 # hotmail ? co ? uk Y
Molly Mockford xumn # mollymockford ? me ? uk Y
Oliver Braggins oliver ? braggins # hotmail ? com Y
Paul Cummins paulcummins # tiscali ? co ? uk Y
Roger Burton West roger+unna201205 # firedrake ? org Y


Voted NO:

Brian Brian # bjforster ? force9 ? co ? uk N
DG dg # dickgaughan ? co ? uk N
Ian Clifton ian ? clifton # chem ? ox ? ac ? uk N
Ian Jackson ijackson # chiark ? greenend ? org ? uk N
John Blundell jcb ? news # ntlworld ? com N
Mark Goodge mark # good-stuff ? co ? uk N
Matthew Vernon matthew # debian ? org N
Michael Parry mjp # crowsnest ? co ? uk N
Mike Bristow mike # urgle ? com N
Nick Leverton nick # leverton ? org N
Peter Parry peter # wpp ? ltd ? uk N
Richard Kettlewell rjk # terraraq ? org ? uk N
Steve Firth vote # malloc ? co ? uk N
Victor Meldrew vicmeld # gmail ? com N


Voted ABSTAIN:

Andrew Hodgson andrew # hodgsonfamily ? org A
Tony tony # darkstorm ? co ? uk A


REJECTED VOTES:

Paul {voter} # watman ? clara ? co ? uk N
Vote received out of time

=====================================================================

Votetaker Comments:

A straightforward vote. Many thanks to the Proponent and voters for
making this an easy vote to conduct.

The accidental email referred to in the summary of email received was
due to me dropping an exported email into the wrong local folder. No
harm done other than to a few disgruntled electrons.

=====================================================================

This vote was conducted by a neutral third party member of UKVoting.
UKVoting is a group of independent votetakers who count votes on behalf
of the uk.* hierarchy and other 3rd parties.

The rules under which votes for the uk.* hierarchy are taken are posted
regularly to uk.net.news.announce or can be found at the following URL:

<http://www.usenet.org.uk/voting.html>

The UKVoting web pages can be found at <http://www.ukvoting.org.uk/>

There is a five day discussion period after these results are posted to
uk.net.news.announce. Allegations of irregularity should be sent to
control [AT] usenet [DOT] org [DOT] uk

=====================================================================

RATIONALE

The uk.* usenet hierarchy is held in high regard by News Providers
because the hierarchy is well managed. Within that management is the
opportunity and duty to remove groups which are not being used to any
extent.

According to my own news spool, there have been no on-topic postings
since before August 2011, and the majority of postings are cross-posted
spam from US groups.

This group is clearly now not being used to any extent whatsoever. It
should be removed.

=====================================================================

PROPONENT's Summary of Discussion

uk.media.newspapers is a group that is virtually unused but for
spam and off-topic cross-posting.

Although one potentially on-topic post was identified, it was
agreed in discussion that this was not, in fact the case, and in
any case a single valid post in over 2 years did not mean this
group was viable.

The discussion, as ever, moved to the general question of
removing groups, and the general consensus appears to be that
this group, along with others to be identified, is dead and should
be given a decent burial.

Although there were discussions on the validity of a single
post, no-one spoke for retention of the group.

As such the appearance of a complaint to the fast track was a
surprise, as the objector does not appear to have taken any part in
the discussion.

The proponent therefore seeks a simple yes/no vote on whether this
spam-filled and otherwise almost entirely unused group should be
removed.

=====================================================================

CHANGES from the last RFD

None.

=====================================================================

NEWSGROUPS LINE

uk.media.newspapers Read all about it! Discussion of UK newspapers

=====================================================================

CHARTER: uk.media.newspapers

The uk.media.newspapers newsgroup is for the discussion of newspapers
published in the UK, either on sale at news-stands or delivered free to
your door, either local or national in focus. It is not intended that
magazines, published separately from newspapers, will be discussed here.

Advertising

While discussion of advertising within newspapers is relevant and so is
encouraged, posting adverts to the newsgroup is strictly forbidden, with
these three exceptions:

1. Suppliers of goods and services pertinent to the production of UK
newspapers may post a pointer to relevant resources on the Internet or an
invitation that readers may request details from them. Such a message must
not exceed six lines and must not be posted more frequently than once every
nine weeks. The subject line of such a posting must begin with the word
"ADVERT".

2. Advertisements containing news of jobs available within the newspaper
industry may be posted, but no job may be advertised more than once, and
such advertisements may not exceed twenty lines. If this is insufficient,
it is recommended that the advertisement include details of where further
information may be found. The subject line of such a posting must begin
with the word "JOB". Cross-posting such advertisements to uk.jobs.offered
is appropriate.

3. Participants in discussions may include references to their
newspaper-related business in their signature only if the signature does
not exceed four lines.

Binaries

All posts must be made in plain text; HTML and other types of formatted
text are forbidden. Posting URLs of relevant Internet sites, where
appropriate, is encouraged.

With the explicit exception of PGP signatures, all encoded binaries are
forbidden. Forbidden binaries include, but are not limited to: pictures,
sounds, word processor documents, executable programs and "business cards".
You are invited to read a guide on the World Wide Web at
http://www.usenet.org.uk/ukpost.html for further information on how to
configure your newsreader to post to uk.* newsgroups.

Anyone posting advertisements, binaries or other material contrary to this
charter may be reported to their ISP or postmaster.

END CHARTER

=====================================================================

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 1.4.10
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBUAcqz2OfGXkh8vHZAQFzvgP8CoKPVYTYy/q+inve2bXSnXEHTLNInILE
t65ElXSRoKB8r0dpKiFk37Fa+7rSBFGiKPFTAg90EDu/1o/B9pZKrqm1bSZp3gIi
4MNI7NjGTiu5IORBjkF7hPYMtVY28eiujb4p4k/qkGEGsEQtNe4sqfJ2qsaTISGZ
CyIDK3anXjA=
=6ODW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Paul Cummins]

In article
<result-uk.media.newspapers-20120718212950$22...@matrix.darkstorm.co.uk>,
p.sc...@ukvoting.org.uk (Pedt Scragg) wrote:

> Votetaker: Pedt Scragg

My thanks to Pedt for taking this vote in his usual scrupulously fair and
highly efficient manner.

> Voted NO:
>
> Brian Brian # bjforster ? force9 ? co ? uk

> DG dg # dickgaughan ? co ? uk

> Ian Clifton ian ? clifton # chem ? ox ? ac ? uk

> Ian Jackson ijackson # chiark ? greenend ? org ? uk

> John Blundell jcb ? news # ntlworld ? com

> Mark Goodge mark # good-stuff ? co ? uk

> Matthew Vernon matthew # debian ? org

> Michael Parry mjp # crowsnest ? co ? uk

> Mike Bristow mike # urgle ? com

> Nick Leverton nick # leverton ? org

> Peter Parry peter # wpp ? ltd ? uk

> Richard Kettlewell rjk # terraraq ? org ? uk

> Steve Firth vote # malloc ? co ? uk

> Victor Meldrew vicmeld # gmail ? com

I expect to see all 14 of you actually using this group within the next
30 days, or a new RFD goes in, which will call you all hypocrites.

--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Catching a train home from work

[John Hall]

In article <memo.2012071...@postmaster.cix.co.uk>,

Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> writes:
>I expect to see all 14 of you actually using this group within the next
>30 days, or a new RFD goes in, which will call you all hypocrites.

It's surely not necessary to use a group oneself to think that it should
be retained. I don't have any interest in many subjects that have uk.*
newsgroups devoted to them, but I don't think that those groups should
all be removed.
--
John Hall

"The beatings will continue until morale improves."
Attributed to the Commander of Japan's Submarine Forces in WW2

[Molly Mockford]

At 09:54:42 on Thu, 19 Jul 2012, John Hall <nospam...@jhall.co.uk>
wrote in <RWx94nDS...@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid>:

>In article <memo.2012071...@postmaster.cix.co.uk>,
> Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> writes:
>>I expect to see all 14 of you actually using this group within the next
>>30 days, or a new RFD goes in, which will call you all hypocrites.
>
>It's surely not necessary to use a group oneself to think that it should
>be retained. I don't have any interest in many subjects that have uk.*
>newsgroups devoted to them, but I don't think that those groups should
>all be removed.

However, I would like to see all such decisions taken on the basis of
whether the group is or is not still in use and of benefit to the users
of the hierarchy, and not on the basis of the proponent's behaviour,
however obnoxious.
--
Molly - I don't speak for the Committee. I speak for me.
Nature loves variety. Unfortunately, society hates it. (Milton
Diamond Ph.D.)
My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not be so for ever.

[Mike Bristow]

In article <memo.2012071...@postmaster.cix.co.uk>,

Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> I expect to see all 14 of you actually using this group within the next
> 30 days, or a new RFD goes in, which will call you all hypocrites.

What's hypocritical about me not using the group, the views
expressed in <slrnjtm91e...@cheddar.urgle.com>, and my vote?

The appear to be consistant.

Cheers,
Mike

PS: calling people who voted against your proposal names is unlikely
to change their mind in any re-run.


--
Mike Bristow mi...@urgle.com

[Ian Clifton]

uset...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins) writes:

> In article
> <result-uk.media.newspapers-20120718212950$22...@matrix.darkstorm.co.uk>,
> p.sc...@ukvoting.org.uk (Pedt Scragg) wrote:
>
>> Votetaker: Pedt Scragg
>
> My thanks to Pedt for taking this vote in his usual scrupulously fair and
> highly efficient manner.
>

Seconded, and I’d like to thank the proponent for taking on the
Sisyphean task of tidying up UK Usenet, and, last but not least, the
anonymous fast‐track objector who—if we assume, as we must, that a vote
cannot lie—saved us all from wrongly removing a newsgroup.

>> Voted NO:
>>
>> Brian Brian # bjforster ? force9 ? co ? uk
>> DG dg # dickgaughan ? co ? uk
>> Ian Clifton ian ? clifton # chem ? ox ? ac ? uk
>> Ian Jackson ijackson # chiark ? greenend ? org ? uk
>> John Blundell jcb ? news # ntlworld ? com
>> Mark Goodge mark # good-stuff ? co ? uk
>> Matthew Vernon matthew # debian ? org
>> Michael Parry mjp # crowsnest ? co ? uk
>> Mike Bristow mike # urgle ? com
>> Nick Leverton nick # leverton ? org
>> Peter Parry peter # wpp ? ltd ? uk
>> Richard Kettlewell rjk # terraraq ? org ? uk
>> Steve Firth vote # malloc ? co ? uk
>> Victor Meldrew vicmeld # gmail ? com
>
> I expect to see all 14 of you actually using this group within the next
> 30 days, or a new RFD goes in, which will call you all hypocrites.

Sounds a bit like the plot of “The Four Feathers”! Are you going to
rescue me, when I’ve been captured by Fuzzy‐Wuzzies, and make me take my
vote back?

Admittedly, there might be a couple of rogues in your gallery, the
Fourteen Guilty Men, but I’m sure a couple of us, like me, certainly
weren’t voting just to see you lose. Neither do we have strong feelings,
either way, about this particular group. In a way, that’s the point, the
process has gone wrong when an “innocent” newsgroup becomes caught up in
a titanic battle of wills between factions.

I might, of course, even make a post in uk.media.newspapers—why not, I
read newspapers, don’t you?— as everyone is free to do, or not,
irrespective of how they voted.

Maybe the proponent of a tidying‐up motion is in a similar position to
that of a ship’s captain caught on a lee shore—much as he would like to
get involved with the argy‐bargy of debate, he must flee it, because in
becoming too embroiled he gets bogged down:

Let me only say that it fared with him as with the storm‐tossed
ship, that miserably drives along the leeward land. The port would
fain give succor; the port is pitiful; in the port is safety,
comfort, hearthstone, supper, warm blankets, friends, all that’s
kind to our mortalities. But in that gale, the port, the land, is
that ship’s direst jeopardy; she must fly all hospitality; one touch
of land, though it but graze the keel, would make her shudder
through and through. With all her might she crowds all sail off
shore; in so doing, fights ’gainst the very winds that fain would
blow her homeward; seeks all the lashed sea’s landlessness again;
for refuge’s sake forlornly rushing into peril; her only friend her
bitterest foe!
…
Terrors of the terrible! is all this agony so vain? Take heart,
take heart, O Bulkington! Bear thee grimly, demigod! Up from the
spray of thy ocean‐perishing –straight up, leaps thy apotheosis!

--
Ian ◎

[Dick Gaughan]

In <4IoH7Nf2...@molly.mockford> on Thu, 19 Jul 2012 10:39:02

+0100, Molly Mockford <nospam...@mollymockford.me.uk> wrote:

>However, I would like to see all such decisions taken on the basis of
>whether the group is or is not still in use and of benefit to the users
>of the hierarchy, and not on the basis of the proponent's behaviour,
>however obnoxious.

Under normal circumstances I would entirely agree with you.
However, this was not normal circumstance.

The proponent had perverted the entire process into a ridiculous
juvenile piece of ego-massaging farce, arrogantly responding to
questions and disagreement with "I'm right and I don't have to
listen to anyone else's POV".

I did not, and do not, believe that allowing him to proceed would
have been in the best interests of the hierarchy, which is why I
voted against removal in this instance. The fact that he has
responded to the result with exactly the same arrogance as he
conducted the RFD simply consolidates my view.

I would have voted the same way had it been a different proponent
behaving in the same manner.

--
DG

[Steve Firth]

Somewhere, and admittedly it is somewhere separated from your present
location by several hundred AUs, there is a lost and lonely clue waiting
for you to connect with it.

In the meantime, this middle finger here? Sit on it and swivel.

[John Blundell]

In article <memo.2012071...@postmaster.cix.co.uk>, Paul

Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> writes

>I expect to see all 14 of you actually using this group within the next
>30 days, or a new RFD goes in, which will call you all hypocrites.

I accepted the argument that newsgroup removal should be
non-controversial. So if no one objects it can go to fast track and be
done with. If there is objection, the removal of that particular group
should be abandoned for the time being, but perhaps revisited at a later
time, maybe a year or two hence. It should not have been brought to a
vote, so therefore I voted in favour of the status quo ante. The
intended use of the group and whether I use it is irrelevant. If similar
circumstances occur again, expect me to vote against removal again.

[Judith]

On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 10:39:02 +0100, Molly Mockford
<nospam...@mollymockford.me.uk> wrote:

>At 09:54:42 on Thu, 19 Jul 2012, John Hall <nospam...@jhall.co.uk>
>wrote in <RWx94nDS...@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid>:
>
>>In article <memo.2012071...@postmaster.cix.co.uk>,
>> Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> writes:
>>>I expect to see all 14 of you actually using this group within the next
>>>30 days, or a new RFD goes in, which will call you all hypocrites.
>>
>>It's surely not necessary to use a group oneself to think that it should
>>be retained. I don't have any interest in many subjects that have uk.*
>>newsgroups devoted to them, but I don't think that those groups should
>>all be removed.
>
>However, I would like to see all such decisions taken on the basis of
>whether the group is or is not still in use and of benefit to the users
>of the hierarchy, and not on the basis of the proponent's behaviour,
>however obnoxious.

Exactly so.

It would be most interesting to hear the views of those who posted "no" as to
why they did so.

Also a pity to see that not all members of the committee could be arsed to
vote: perhaps they have no interest in uk usenet; but they are of course quite
important and it will look good on a CV that they are elected members of the
august body.

[Molly Mockford]

At 16:55:45 on Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Judith <jmsmi...@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote in <kabg08tt6b6ckpb5t...@4ax.com>:

>Also a pity to see that not all members of the committee could be arsed
>to vote: perhaps they have no interest in uk usenet; but they are of
>course quite important and it will look good on a CV that they are
>elected members of the august body.

What absolute bollocks.

[Brian]

On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:13 +0100 (BST), uset...@stedtelephone.invalid
(Paul Cummins) wrote:

>In article
><result-uk.media.newspapers-20120718212950$22...@matrix.darkstorm.co.uk>,
>p.sc...@ukvoting.org.uk (Pedt Scragg) wrote:
>
>> Votetaker: Pedt Scragg
>
>My thanks to Pedt for taking this vote in his usual scrupulously fair and
>highly efficient manner.

Indeed so. The only part of your post with which I am in complete
agreement.

>> Voted NO:

<snip> list of voters with self in pole position: one of the
incidental disadvantages of an initial occurring early in the
alphabet.

>
>I expect to see all 14 of you actually using this group within the next
>30 days, or a new RFD goes in, which will call you all hypocrites.

Mr Cummins, you do not know me from Adam, nor I you. Does contingently
undertaking to hurl personal abuse at a complete stranger normally
constitute your idea of interpersonal communication?

You have not the slightest notion why I cast my vote in the way I did,
and, since I am not accountable to you in this matter, this is a state
of affairs likely to persist.

It seems to me, if I may say so, that you may be having difficulty
accepting the democratic will of the majority who expressed an
opinion. If this is the case, I wonder whether the good management of
the hierarchy might be better served by passing the mantle of
proponent on to another?

Regards, though on this occasion less than kind ones,

Brian
Brian

Remove 2001. to reply by email.

[Judith]

On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 18:40:51 +0100, Molly Mockford
<nospam...@mollymockford.me.uk> wrote:

>At 16:55:45 on Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Judith <jmsmi...@hotmail.co.uk>
>wrote in <kabg08tt6b6ckpb5t...@4ax.com>:
>
>>Also a pity to see that not all members of the committee could be arsed
>>to vote: perhaps they have no interest in uk usenet; but they are of
>>course quite important and it will look good on a CV that they are
>>elected members of the august body.
>
>What absolute bollocks.

Yes - it was over the top intentionally and hardly serious.

Part of it was said without tongue in cheek - let me try again.

I see that a number of the members of the committee could not be arsed to vote.

They are obviously very interested in the running of uk usenet.

What absolute bollocks.

[Tony]

Using the RFD process to further your own agenda is one of the reasons you
received a negative response from some people, in my view.

It's not your group, and people have voted for it to stay, so move on.
--
Tony Evans
Saving trees and wasting electrons since 1993
blog -> http://perceptionistruth.com/
books -> http://www.bookthing.co.uk/
[ anything below this line wasn't written by me ]

[Judith]

What do you think his own agenda was?

[Tony]

I already replied once, sadly, via e-mail (still not used to slrn, must
change the key mapping). Here's the summary for everyone else,

1. I think engaging in discussion with Judith is pointless because
eventually she just decides you're lying or a fuckwit.
2. However, I'm a glutton for punishment.
3. I think Paul started out with the right intention (improve the
hierarchy) but turned the process into 'justify Paul' as his agenda.
4. That's my belief, and it's 100% true to start it as my belief even if
the actual truth of Paul's behaviour is different.

Meanwhile, I've edited my .slrnc so that in future when I'm stupid, I
can at least retrieve the e-mail and paste it as a follow-up.

[Steve Firth]

Same as it ever was. Same as it ever was...

[Judith]

On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:23:26 +0000 (UTC), Tony <to...@darkstorm.invalid> wrote:

>On 2012-07-20, Judith <jmsmi...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:29:41 +0100, Tony <to...@darkstorm.invalid> wrote:
>>>Using the RFD process to further your own agenda is one of the reasons you
>>>received a negative response from some people, in my view.
>>
>>
>> What do you think his own agenda was?
>>
>
>I already replied once, sadly, via e-mail (still not used to slrn, must
>change the key mapping). Here's the summary for everyone else,
>
>1. I think engaging in discussion with Judith is pointless because
>eventually she just decides you're lying or a fuckwit.

Thank you for your responses

[John Briggs]

To sucker you into voting the wrong way, just because Cummins happened
(randomly and by accident) to be right?
--
John Briggs

[Steve Firth]

I don't consider Cummins to have been right or my vote to have been wrong.
Cummins agenda, as ever, is to feed his massive ego. Although how someone
who when he isn't slipping on banana skins is looking for the smelliest dog
poo to step in can have such a massive ego is a mystery.

[Clive D. W. Feather]

In message <itkg081nougkb1lqd...@4ax.com>, Judith

<jmsmi...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>I see that a number of the members of the committee could not be arsed to vote.
>They are obviously very interested in the running of uk usenet.

Have you actually read my personal statement from the 2009 election? If
not, I suggest you do so.

(I didn't vote because real life got in the way.)

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home: <cl...@davros.org>
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: <http://www.davros.org>
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: <cl...@davros.org>

[Paul Cummins]

In article
<1851797847364594850.592239%steve%-mallo...@news.eternal-september.org

>, %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:

> Although how someone who when he isn't slipping on banana skins is
> looking for the smelliest dog poo to step in can have such a massive
> ego is a mystery.

No more a mystery that your continued existence, the number of people you
upset...

Anyway, do you know how hard it is to find dog shit to step in nowadays?

[Nick Leverton]

In article <4uunS8jj...@molly.mockford>,

Molly Mockford <usene...@mollymockford.me.uk> wrote:
>At 16:55:45 on Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Judith <jmsmi...@hotmail.co.uk>
>wrote in <kabg08tt6b6ckpb5t...@4ax.com>:
>
>>Also a pity to see that not all members of the committee could be arsed
>>to vote: perhaps they have no interest in uk usenet; but they are of
>>course quite important and it will look good on a CV that they are
>>elected members of the august body.
>
>What absolute bollocks.

Actually I noticed that many of the committee voted for removal so I
don't know what Judith's complaint is here. I had my own reasons for
voting against which are certainly not based on personality, it was a
close decision and if I had had any reason to suspect this amount of
hassle was a one-off I might have voted with the Cabal too (TINC) ...

Nick
--
"The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life"
-- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996

[Andrew Hodgson]

On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:17:19 +0100, John Blundell <m...@privacy.invalid>
wrote:

I couldn't have put it better myself. I couldn't quite say a blanket
"no" to the vote, I was sure it wouldn't get through anyway, but
didn't really want to vote to get rid of it based on the fast-track
process.

However, there were quite a few people who did vote yes, and I suspect
the argument for removing it will be increased when it comes round for
discussion again.

As you say, move onto the next group.

Andrew.

[Paul Cummins]

We were about to embark at Dover, when to...@darkstorm.invalid (Tony) came
up to me and whispered:

> 4. That's my belief, and it's 100% true to start it as my
> belief even if the actual truth of Paul's behaviour is different.

And while I disagree with your point of view, I will defend your right to
express it, no matter how negative towards me it may be.

--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead

Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx

---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----

[Tony]

In uk.net.news.config, uset...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins) wrote:

>We were about to embark at Dover, when to...@darkstorm.invalid (Tony) came
>up to me and whispered:
>
>> 4. That's my belief, and it's 100% true to start it as my
>> belief even if the actual truth of Paul's behaviour is different.
>
>And while I disagree with your point of view, I will defend your right to
>express it, no matter how negative towards me it may be.

I mistyped state as start, sigh proof reading fail.

I try not to think negatively of you Paul, I think most people in life are
normal, sensible, people who only want to do the right thing without too
much effort or risk for themselves. I'm the last person to lecture anyone
about not defending a lost cause, I just think in the end, you were
championing your own involvement more than the specific group. I tried
several times to encourage you to give it up. And I support your right to
do whatever you feel is right.