RESULT : Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated PASSES 128:24
Jon Ribbens
RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
Summary: Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated
Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated PASSES 128:24
YES beat NO by a majority of 104 votes. For group passage, there must be
12 more YES votes than NO votes. Accordingly, the proposal PASSES.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Voting closed at 23:59:59 BST, 7th August 2009.
Proponent : Ian Jackson
<ijackson (at) chiark (dot) greenend (dot) org (dot) uk
Votetaker : Pedt Scragg <xuld-query (at) pedt.demon.co.uk>
Succeeded by Jon Ribbens <j.ribbens (at) ukvoting.org.uk>
for the vote count.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribution:
uk.net.news.announce
uk.net.news.config
uk.rec.cycling
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
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) Votetakers Comments
5) Voting and Appeal Guidelines
6) Rationale
7) Newsgroups Line
8) Proposed Charter
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY OF MAIL RECEIVED DURING THE VOTING PERIOD
194 emails were received at the ballot request address:
193 : valid ballot requests
1 : test by the votetaker
176 emails were received at the vote submission address:
170 : valid votes (including re-votes)
1 : someone requesting a ballot paper back to the autoresponder
1 : email regarding the vote
1 : blank email
1 : email received out of time
2 : tests by the votetaker
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESULTS:
Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated
YES : 128 votes
NO : 24 votes
ABSTAIN : 4 votes
-------------------
Total : 156 votes
YES beat NO by a majority of 104 votes. For group passage, there must be
12 more YES votes than NO votes. Accordingly, the proposal PASSES.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
INDIVIDUAL VOTE DETAILS
Voted YES:
pschleck * net,novia,oasis Paul W. Schleck Y
cam * uk,ac,ed,holyrood Chris Malcolm Y
pete.whelan * com,talk21 Pete Whelan Y
steve * uk,co,stevegouldstone steveg Y
goo18731 * uk,co,yahoo PhilO Y
damerell+urcm * uk,org,greenend,chiark David Damerell Y
spiralpathways * com,googlemail Colin Langdon Y
news003 * uk,me,woodall Tim Woodall Y
a24061a * com,ducksburg Adam Funk Y
urcmvote * uk,co,f9,chthonic Mike Trinder Y
Emcmiddleton * com,aol Emily Middleton Y
palmersperry * com,yahoo Alistair Gunn Y
cgv * de,aprice Andrew Price Y
mrc7 * uk,ac,cam Mike Clark Y
andrew_d_may * com,hotmail Andrew May Y
news06 * com,crazyscot Ross Younger Y
wirral_cyclist * uk,co,yahoo Neil Jones Y
markonnewsgroups * uk,co,yahoo Mark McNeill Y
owend * uk,org,greenend,chiark Owen Dunn Y
ian.clifton * uk,ac,ox,chem I J Clifton Y
freezing77 * com,gmail MJP Y
mad_cyclist * uk,co,hotmail dave lambert Y
eleanorb * com,gmail Eleanor Blair Y
socks-netnews * li,earth Stephen Gower Y
keith * org,flat222 Keith Willoughby Y
felix * com,felixmottram Felix Mottram Y
peter * uk,co,demon,plgrange Peter Grange Y
dglassey * com,gmail Daniel Glassey Y
stillyet * com,googlemail Simon Brooke Y
mountainoaf * com,gmail Mark Harris Y
matthew * uk,ac,cam,sel Matthew Vernon Y
{$mrtickle$} * uk,co,demon,mrtickle Mike Henry Y
clareb+urcm * uk,org,greenend,chiark Clare Boothby Y
rat_at_at_at * com,hotmail OG Y
bob * uk,co,downie-geo geomannie Y
JeremyParker * com,compuserve Jeremy Parker Y
idh * uk,co,henden Ian Y
prgs * net,scandrett Peter Scandrett Y
andrewm * uk,org,greenend,chiark Andrew Mobbs Y
jpixton * com,gmail Joseph Birr-Pixton Y
guy.chapman * uk,co,chapmancentral Guy Chapman Y
mike * nz,co,ballantine EMB Y
kat.news * com,ntlworld kat Y
saramerriman * uk,co,blueyonder Sara Merriman Y
chris * uk,org,fluffhouse Chris Jackson Y
mark * uk,co,good-stuff Mark Goodge Y
cgf * uk,co,familyfrench Chris French Y
d * uk,co,redpedals Danny Colyer Y
real-not-anti-spam-address * uk,co,apple-juice D.M. Procida Y
{R} * org,semolina,voting {R} Y
steve * uk,co,puppet-head Steve Y
maurice * uk,co,demon,grappenhall Maurice Leslie Y
rex.belcher * uk,ac,ox,eng Rex Y
mike * com,urgle Mike Bristow Y
blahdiblah * com,freeuk Dave Johnson Y
D.H.Davis * uk,ac,bath Dennis Davis Y
crn * com,netunix crn Y
jbpnaylon * uk,co,yahoo john Y
armb * uk,org,greenend,chiark Alan Braggins Y
pwomack * uk,co,papermule bugbear Y
martin.dann * net,virgin Martin Dann Y
ncliffe * com,btinternet Nigel Cliffe Y
kim * net,ductilebiscuit Kim Wall Y
daniel * net,dignam Daniel Dignam Y
pag * com,mythic-beasts Paul Gilkerson Y
dickon * net,cantab Dickon Reed Y
xpzzzz * net,tesco none Y
pcoach * ca,htac hbhb Y
dan * net,telent Daniel Barlow Y
andyl * com,plus,azaal Andy Leighton Y
bod43 * uk,co,hotmail bod43 Y
merriman * com,sarlet Roger Merriman Y
james.annan * com,gmail James Annan Y
timhenderson * com,sky Tim Henderson Y
inbox * uk,co,globalnet,pattle Andrew Pattle Y
ret28 * uk,ac,cam Richard Thrippleton Y
congokid * com,congokid congokid Y
monkeyhanger1968 * net,netscape Chris Slade Y
k1100t * com,gmail Bob Y
mcpheat * com,hotmail R McPheat Y
michael.richard.jones * com,gmail Mike Jones Y
mike * uk,co,tauzero Mike Fleming Y
paul * uk,co,eclipse,pluton Paul Luton Y
steve.williams1000 * com,ntlworld Steve Williams Y
john * com,plus,zothique John Kendall Y
davidh * uk,co,spidacom David Hansen Y
tapan * uk,co,blueyonder Trevor A Panther Y
brian13434 * uk,co,yahoo BD (Brian Duffell) Y
ijackson * uk,org,greenend,chiark Ian Jackson Y
colin.nelson2 * com,ntlworld Colin Nelson Y
martin * uk,co,demon,thequiff Martin Richardson Y
nospam * com,ntlworld Rob Morley Y
urcm-jan * org,tarasowka Jan Wysocki Y
nick * org,shmanahar Jim Y
colin * uk,co,colinreed Colin Reed Y
phil * uk,co,kantaka Phil Armstrong Y
timhall * uk,co,clara Tim Hall Y
keith.wunohsix * com,btinternet Keitht Y
phil * uk,me,lee-family Phil W Lee Y
jdamery * uk,org,greenend,chiark Jonathan David Amery Y
peter * uk,ltd,wpp Peter Parry Y
tcnw81 * uk,co,demon,tarrcity Wm... Y
h-c-s * uk,co,hotmail wafflycat Y
owenrees * com,waitrose Owen Rees Y
{voter} * uk,co,clara,watman paul Y
passingtyke * uk,co,myzen,tillotson Passing Tyke Y
pmaydell * uk,org,greenend,chiark Peter Maydell Y
r.thorpe * uk,ac,warwick Roger Thorpe Y
clive * uk,co,evil-c Clive George Y
bigfoot * org,davros Anthony R. Gold Y
alan * uk,co,maydavid Alan Lee Y
p3t3r.f0rd * com,gmail Peter Ford Y
clive * uk,co,demon,cmartin Clive Martin Y
legs_larry * com,yahoo Dave Larrington Y
jpmg * uk,ac,cam,eng Patrick Gosling Y
cfv * com,thegerhards Chris Gerhard Y
peter.keller * nz,co,ihug Peter Keller Y
unet0609 * org,ukfsn,PeterFox Peter Fox Y
daviduri * com,bigfoot David Uri Y
john * uk,co,hairy-bunnets hbunnet Y
rudil * uk,ac,sussex Rudi Lutz Y
ganesh * li,earth Ganesh Sittampalam Y
dot * at,dotat Tony Finch Y
phil * uk,org,ridgway Phil Ridgway Y
alex * uk,co,ap-consulting Alex Potter Y
paul * uk,co,rudin Paul Rudin Y
roger * org,firedrake Roger Burton West Y
rjk * uk,org,greenend Richard Kettlewell Y
Voted NO:
nigel * com,nigedanton Nige Danton N
noparadise * com,gmail Allan Hack-Barr N
peadar.ruadh * com,gmail Peter J Ross N
mail * com,britishschoolofcycling Tom Crispin N
mark * net,homeip,aziraphale Mark Williams N
judithmsmith * uk,co,live Judith Smith N
tony.dragon * com,btinternet Tony Dragon N
huge * uk,org,huge Huge N
urcm * uk,me,meldrew Victor Meldrew N
ACROSLAN * com,altera Andrew Crosland N
the.happy.hippy * com,ntlworld The Happy Hippy N
peter * uk,co,pandasys pcb1962 N
Brian * uk,co,force9,bjforster Brian N
jax65 * net,talktalk Jackie Eastwood N
mikeandmichellesmailbox * com,gmail Aard N
david.kemper * com,ntlworld David Kemper N
vote * uk,co,malloc Steve Firth N
albenito * uk,co,freeserve,eclipse2k Allan Bennett N
jefrs * uk,co,jeffslade Jeff Slade N
Roger.Collier * COM,Sun Roger Collier N
matt.bourke * com,london Matt B N
eddie * org,deguello Eddie N
pipryder * com,gmail Philip Ryder N
censorshipnoto * uk,co,yahoo Mr Benn N
Voted ABSTAIN:
nospam * name,nominet .mother A
ian * uk,org,astounding Ian SMith A
usenet05 * uk,me,drabble Graham Drabble A
chaz * com,chaz6 Chris Hills A
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
REJECTED VOTES
y5ojlnx02 * com,sneakemail Mark Y
Sent via an email-anonymising service (sneakemail.com)
steve * uk,org,clarke Steve Clarke Y
Received out of time
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Votetaker Comments:
This vote had one of the largest turn-outs for very many years, with 156
votes accepted.
The votetaker for the entire voting period was Pedt Scragg, but
unfortunately he went incommunicado before any results were produced.
This eventuality was prepared for, however, with all the voting emails
being backed-up on the central UKVoting server. After it appeared that
Pedt was definitely not going to return imminently, the vote count was
taken over by myself, Jon Ribbens.
I have therefore prepared these results with an eye to getting the
process concluded with reasonable efficiency. There did not appear
to me to be any significant amount of vote fraud, and the margin of
the result - 104 votes - means that investigating any few individual
suspect votes could not possibly affect the outcome, and would only
delay the result further.
I did reject two votes. One was received after the voting deadline, so
is a straightforward reject. The other was sent via an email service,
sneakemail.com, which appears to be specifically intended to hide and
anonymise sender information.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.org.uk
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
RATIONALE
uk.rec.cycling has for some time been suffering from trolling,
nym-shifting and forgeries. Many of these posts are abusive and
hostile to cycling. Repetitive flamage now constitutes 50-75% of
the group by number of articles. This ongoing and worsening problem
has been making the group nearly unuseable for ordinary discussion;
many posters have already left.
I therefore propose that we should create:
uk.rec.cycling.moderated
===================================================================
PROPONENT's Summary of Discussion
This CFV (and the 2nd RFD, which was almost identical) is the
result of major changes made to the 1st RFD following extensive 1st
RFD discussion. The current proposal is much shorter and simpler
than the 1st RFD and and has a much more light-touch moderation
policy.
Following the 2nd RFD there was once more an extensive and wide
ranging discussion. Unfortunately, of the >1400 articles, a
majority were personal abuse and off-topic ranting. However, there
were also some important and relevant points.
At least 31 people posted to say that they were in favour of the
proposal and would like to see it enacted; some of these were
departed posters from urc who said they would return to use the new
group.
Many specific questions were asked about the moderators' views
about various kinds of moderation decision. One proposed moderator
reviewed a period of posts to uk.rec.cycling and posted a list of
messages they would have approved.
Questions were asked and about my technical facilities and skills
as proposed moderation systems host; additionally the operator of
moderation.org.uk kindly volunteered to help with the hosting.
Some people objected to moderation in principle, and/or raised more
detailed objections. While these objections were strongly expressed
and vigorously pursued often at length, they came from only a handful
of posters and in my view were not supported more generally.
The method by which the moderators were selected was again examined
in some detail. It was suggested that the moderators should be
individually elected. This would be an unusual practice for a
moderated group and in my view raises at least as many problems as it
solves. The discussion consensus was in favour of the usual approach
(which is to vote on the moderation panel as a whole, and thereafter
have the moderators appoint their successors).
The question of the crossposting policy was once again discussed at
length. Even amonst more experienced participants in the discussion
there was no clear consensus on whether the moderation policy should
absolutely ban all crossposting. I have chosen to retain the existing
wording as this will be more truthful (for example, appropriate usenet
management announcements such as RFDs will be permitted the new
moderated group). The moderators made it clear that they intend to
ban crossposing to uk.rec.cycling and of course crossposted trolling.
There was extensive discussion of the appeal and escalation options
and processes available to people who disagree with moderation
decisions; the answers did not appear to satisfy the objectors.
There was much discussion of the exact status of .signatures,
particularly .sigs containing inflammatory statements (which have been
a problematic feature in urc). The moderators indicated that messages
with flamebait in the .sig would be rejected. A few posters objected
and complained that this wasn't spelled out in the moderation policy.
Some other objections I rejected: The moderation panel was a clique.
The encouragement of `General discussion amongst UK cyclists' was
purely there to allow the clique to post whatever they liked. The
point was to let people be nasty to trolls without letting trolls
reply. Permitting limited discussion of the moderation policy in
the group itself would surely spell doom for the new group. The
moderators should not blacklist persistent offenders or should only
do so with reference to some formal procedure. Crossposting was not
being 100% ruled out because the plan was to crosspost trolling rants
in hostile newsgroups. Moderation decisions should be governed by
published procedures to ensure consistency. The failure of
uk.local.yorkshire.moderated demonstrated that creating a moderated
newsgroup could not solve a noise problem. uk.rec.cycling had been
much better recently so it would be better to wait six months and see
if moderation was still needed then.
===================================================================
CHANGES from the last RFD
Banning `obscenity' gave the impression that cursing would not be
permitted, despite the general view (as in the previous discussion)
that it should be allowed. `Obscenity' was also thought rather
vague. There being no reason to retain it, The moderation policy
has been altered to remove `obscenity' from the list of things
prohibited.
Asking posters to uk.rec.cycling to `switch' to the new group was
felt by some to be inappropriate. The moderation policy now speaks
of 'inviting posters and readers' without suggesting that they
should abandon the unmoderated group.
The rationale previously referred to telephone harassment suffered
by a poster to uk.rec.cycling. This didn't add anything to the
proposal and was needlessly controversial so, following suggestions
in the discussion, this has been removed.
There are no changes to the charter or moderator panel.
===================================================================
INITIAL MODERATION POLICY
The following are on-topic and encouraged:
* Discussions regarding cycling within the UK;
* Discussion on cycling more generally, but which retains a focus
on cycling within the UK;
* General discussion amongst UK cyclists;
* Announcements of specific interest to UK cyclists.
The following are prohibited:
* Advertising which is not specifically relevant to UK cycling;
* Personal abuse; flames;
* Repetitious posting which does not bring new information to the
discussion.
Crossposting is at present generally not permitted.
Brief and constructive discussion of the moderation policy is
permitted in the newsgroup itself.
The moderators operate a passlist system, so that messages from
regular on-topic posters can be posted promptly and automatically.
Threads which have descended into repetition or abuse may be closed by
the moderators.
Decisions by individual moderators to approve or reject a posting, or
to close a thread, may be appealed by private email to the whole
moderation panel.
This policy may be updated by the moderation panel as they see fit.
The moderators can be reached at
urcm-mo...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/urcm/
A summary of approved and rejected posts is available on the website.
The moderators will make a regular posting to uk.rec.cycling,
advertising the moderated group and inviting readers and posters.
Moderators:
Alan Braggins
Andy Leighton
Danny Colyer
David Damerell
Ian Jackson
Martin Dann
Nigel Cliffe
Peter Clinch
Peter Fox
Roger Thorpe
Simon Brooke
===================================================================
NEWSGROUPS LINE
uk.rec.cycling.moderated Cycling in the UK (Moderated)
===================================================================
CHARTER: uk.rec.cycling.moderated
This group is for the discussion of all matters relating to cycling
and the UK. Recreational cycling, cycling for transport, racing, and
other forms of cycling are all on-topic.
Moderation will be used to ensure that the group remains civil,
pleasant, and of interest to cyclists.
The moderators may use whatever tools and processes they collectively
feel appropriate to ensure the smooth running of the group.
Binaries and Formatting
Encoded binaries (eg pictures, compressed files, etc.) are
forbidden. Such material belongs on a web or FTP site to which a
pointer may be posted. Cryptographic signatures (eg PGP) may be used
where authentication is important and should be as short as possible.
Posts must be readable as plain text. HTML, RTF and similarly
formatted messages are prohibited. To see how to make some common
news readers comply with this, read
http://www.usenet.org.uk/ukpost.html
END CHARTER
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG-v1.4.6-(GNU/Linux)
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBSrfFKGOfGXkh8vHZAQK87wP/VNVVPRHaxXbS+6P/mXwIF5qDNUJqjV1M
EjC0ZaVz8C94nxMI3heN8Viw9kNKQ6Qzig3BE8NvoKJo8OniK9QloG0Qb6RAKx1d
SiPFHbly93vEAID5wjCkv055ocPRoZ9vtpOMOVXEsUyAtqc5oCV3MxTlNxb90TyA
fKRxXRPJgIE=
=xt5b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Just zis Guy, you know?
> RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
> Summary: Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated
> Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated PASSES 128:24
H!tfd! as they say in the Shed.
--
Guy
Tom Crispin
<j.ri...@ukvoting.org.uk> wrote:
[uk.rec.cycling put back into the NG line. It is customary to warn
posters if follow-ups have been set]
>RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
>
>Summary: Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated
>
>Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated PASSES 128:24
I hope the new group succeeds.
Molly Mockford
wrote in
<result-uk.rec.cycling.moderated-20090921182538$10...@gradwell.net>:
>RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
Thank you, Jon, for taking over and producing a clear set of results in
a fairly short period of time.
I very much hope that we eventually hear that Pedt is OK.
--
Molly
I don't speak for the Committee. If I ever do, it will be made
specifically clear.
My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not be so for ever.
Just zis Guy, you know?
<kije.rem...@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote:
> I hope the new group succeeds.
That's down to us to make it so, Tom, so I hope so too.
How about a launch party in Londonton? I'll buy you a beer to
compensate for not buying you one on Sunday :-)
--
Guy
jms
Yeeeees - as they say in the real world.
--
I have never said that I encourage my children to wear helmets. I would challenge judith to find the place where I said I encourage my children to wear helmets.
I encourage my children to wear helmets. (Guy Chapman)
kat
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 19:52:59 +0100, Molly Mockford
> <nospam...@mollymockford.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> Thank you, Jon, for taking over and producing a clear set of results
>> in a fairly short period of time.
>>
>> I very much hope that we eventually hear that Pedt is OK.
>
> Totally agree - on both statements.
Thirded.
--
kat
>^..^<
paul
Fourf'd
--
paul (C) � 2009 is mine
Tosspot
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>
> RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
>
> Summary: Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated
>
> Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated PASSES 128:24
>
> YES beat NO by a majority of 104 votes. For group passage, there must be
> 12 more YES votes than NO votes. Accordingly, the proposal PASSES.
>
> - -------------------------------------------------------------------------
I shall definitly subscribe to that if it's carried by my ISP. I'll
stay with URC for the time being because at least Fuxxy and Moody Judy
seemed to have exhausted themselves in an orgy of mutual masturbation.
Stuart Millington
<nospam...@mollymockford.me.uk> wrote:
>I very much hope that we eventually hear that Pedt is OK.
Indeed. The silence is very worrying :-(
John Clayton
"Tom Crispin" <kije....@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote in message
news:h2ifb51bg2hae4saq...@4ax.com...
Same here, I'll try to join in next few days.
John "'bout time too" Clayton
Wm...
uk.net.news.config Molly Mockford <nospam...@mollymockford.me.uk>
>Thank you, Jon, for taking over and producing a clear set of results in
>a fairly short period of time.
>
>I very much hope that we eventually hear that Pedt is OK.
wot the lady said
--
Wm...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days
jms
wrote:
Indeed - I am looking forward to the censored group - but of course I
will still make a valid contribution to urc.
--
Latest DfT Figures: Passenger casualty rates by mode Per billion passenger kilometers:
Killed or seriously injured: Pedal Cyclists : 527 Pedestrians 371
All casualties: Pedal Cyclists : 3494 Pedestrians : 1631
Which is more dangerous?
jms
Join "what" in the "next few days"?
Unless Jackson has assumed the result would be a "yes" and has cracked
on making his system work with the rest of the world I suspect it
could be a few weeks away yet.
--
British Medical Association (BMA)
View on helmets:
Several studies provided solid scientific evidence that bicycle helmets
protect against head, brain, severe brain and facial injuries,
as well as death, as a result of cycling accidents
Ian Jackson
Jon Ribbens <j.ri...@ukvoting.org.uk> wrote:
>RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
>Summary: Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated
>Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated PASSES 128:24
Thanks very much, Jon, for quickly picking this up. And thanks to
everyone who voted and helped out with the discussion and of course to
the moderation panel.
I'll blow the dust off the moderation machinery (which is mostly set
up) and figure out what the next steps are, tomorrow. I'm going to
share technical control of the moderation machinery with co-moderator
David Damerell; this will help as I'm going to be away for a week
starting this coming Saturday (and of course in general help provide
cover when either of us is unavailable).
I look forward to seeing the success of the new group.
--
Ian Jackson personal email: <ijac...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
These opinions are my own. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ijackson/
PGP2 key 1024R/0x23f5addb, fingerprint 5906F687 BD03ACAD 0D8E602E FCF37657
Ian Jackson
jms <moderat...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>Unless Jackson has assumed the result would be a "yes" and has cracked
>on making his system work with the rest of the world I suspect it
>could be a few weeks away yet.
I'm an optimist. So yes, I got the moderation machinery set up at my
end during the voting period. I've tested it as best I can and all
seems to be well.
I'll get in touch with Control to work out the technical details, do
final setup, and make sure that David Damerell has a copy of the keys
(so to speak) so he can make any changes that might be needed (since
I'll be away next week, on a long-planned holiday).
Alex Potter
> Thank you, Jon, for taking over and producing a clear set of results in
> a fairly short period of time.
+1
>
> I very much hope that we eventually hear that Pedt is OK.
+1
--
Regards
Alex
chris French
<use...@watman.clara.co.uk> writes
Glad that is finally sorted.
What sort of time scale is it before a newsgroup start appearing on
servers? (in my case NIN)
--
Chris French
bod43
> In article <result-uk.rec.cycling.moderated-20090921182538$1...@gradwell.net>,
> Jon Ribbens <j.ribb...@ukvoting.org.uk> wrote:
>
> >RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
> >Summary: Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated
> >Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated PASSES 128:24
>
> Thanks very much, Jon, for quickly picking this up. And thanks to
> everyone who voted and helped out with the discussion and of course to
> the moderation panel.
Me too - thank you very much for your efforts..
I have little love for the move to moderation however the
recent attacks on the group seem to have left no other
option.
I hope it will work out for the best.
Man With Chip
> compensate for not buying you one on Sunday :-)
Not wishing to gatecrash this, but I'd certainly be interested in
attending. Got some free SWT weekend rail travel tickets to use up.
--
Oaf
kat
That depends. You will see in the OP that there is a 5 day discussion
period and during that time any allegations of irregularity can be sent to
Control. If none are received Control can deal with it straight away,
real life permitting, and NIN are very good about picking up control
messages. If any are received the Comittee will need to discuss them.
--
kat
>^..^<
Just zis Guy, you know?
If anyone is interested, then it will happen through the usual
mechanism of someone naming the pub and the rest of us turning up :-)
--
GUy
Mark
wrote:
>On 22 Sep, 00:13, Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> In article <result-uk.rec.cycling.moderated-20090921182538$1...@gradwell.net>,
>> Jon Ribbens �<j.ribb...@ukvoting.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
>> >Summary: Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated
>> >Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated PASSES 128:24
>>
>> Thanks very much, Jon, for quickly picking this up. �And thanks to
>> everyone who voted and helped out with the discussion and of course to
>> the moderation panel.
>
>Me too - thank you very much for your efforts..
+1
>I have little love for the move to moderation however the
>recent attacks on the group seem to have left no other
>option.
>
>I hope it will work out for the best.
I do admit to be disappointed, however, that my vote was rejected. I
got the immpression that it would be counted after a discussion with
Pedt. (I initially voted through an anonymising email address but
revoted with my real address when my initial vote was rejected).
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
[Reply-to address valid until it is spammed.]
Geoff Berrow
<i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
>>I hope it will work out for the best.
>
>I do admit to be disappointed, however, that my vote was rejected. I
>got the immpression that it would be counted after a discussion with
>Pedt. (I initially voted through an anonymising email address but
>revoted with my real address when my initial vote was rejected).
Did you miss the bit about Pedt having disappeared? No one knows what
has happened to him.
--
Geoff Berrow
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Put thecat out to email
Mark
<blth...@ckdog.co.uk> wrote:
>On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:51:10 +0100, Mark
><i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>I hope it will work out for the best.
>>
>>I do admit to be disappointed, however, that my vote was rejected. I
>>got the immpression that it would be counted after a discussion with
>>Pedt. (I initially voted through an anonymising email address but
>>revoted with my real address when my initial vote was rejected).
>
>Did you miss the bit about Pedt having disappeared? No one knows what
>has happened to him.
This was before he disappeared and I would have expected in any case
my vote not to have been "lost". Other votes have been counted, why
not mine? My corrected vote was sent to the correct email address and
I got a formal acknowledgement.
John Hall
I'd like to echo that.
--
John Hall "Do you have cornflakes in America?"
"Well, actually, they're American."
"So what brings you to Britain then if you have cornflakes already?"
Bill Bryson: "Notes from a Small Island"
kat
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:19:05 +0100, Geoff Berrow
> <blth...@ckdog.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:51:10 +0100, Mark
>> <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>> I hope it will work out for the best.
>>>
>>> I do admit to be disappointed, however, that my vote was rejected.
>>> I got the immpression that it would be counted after a discussion
>>> with Pedt. (I initially voted through an anonymising email address
>>> but revoted with my real address when my initial vote was rejected).
>>
>> Did you miss the bit about Pedt having disappeared? No one knows
>> what has happened to him.
>
> This was before he disappeared and I would have expected in any case
> my vote not to have been "lost". Other votes have been counted, why
> not mine? My corrected vote was sent to the correct email address and
> I got a formal acknowledgement.
Is your corrected vote in the list of accepted votes?
--
kat
>^..^<
Geoff Berrow
<i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
>>Did you miss the bit about Pedt having disappeared? No one knows what
>>has happened to him.
>
>This was before he disappeared and I would have expected in any case
>my vote not to have been "lost". Other votes have been counted, why
>not mine? My corrected vote was sent to the correct email address and
>I got a formal acknowledgement.
<shrug> Difficult circumstances, what would you suggest we do?
Sara
Mark <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:19:05 +0100, Geoff Berrow
> <blth...@ckdog.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:51:10 +0100, Mark
> ><i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >>>I hope it will work out for the best.
> >>
> >>I do admit to be disappointed, however, that my vote was rejected. I
> >>got the immpression that it would be counted after a discussion with
> >>Pedt. (I initially voted through an anonymising email address but
> >>revoted with my real address when my initial vote was rejected).
> >
> >Did you miss the bit about Pedt having disappeared? No one knows what
> >has happened to him.
>
> This was before he disappeared and I would have expected in any case
> my vote not to have been "lost". Other votes have been counted, why
> not mine? My corrected vote was sent to the correct email address and
> I got a formal acknowledgement.
The same happened to me, Pedt didn't think I was a real person since
most of my posting history was in a different name (my maiden name) and
I was posting from the same IP address as someone else - my husband!
I too got an acknowledgment after emailing Pedt to explain that I was
really real, but nothing thereafter.
Since the vote went the way I wanted I'm not too fussed.
--
Married and loving it
Sara
"kat" <kat....@ntlworld.com> wrote:
How would one find that?
Paul Rudin
wafflycat
"Molly Mockford" <nospam...@mollymockford.me.uk> wrote in message
news:wJ$wJ1WLu...@molly.mockford...
> At 19:25:38 on Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Jon Ribbens <j.ri...@ukvoting.org.uk>
> wrote in
> <result-uk.rec.cycling.moderated-20090921182538$10...@gradwell.net>:
>
>>RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
>
> fairly short period of time.
>
Same from me, on both counts.
jms
ffs
It's hardly rocket science.
saramerriman * uk,co,blueyonder Sara Merriman Y
merriman * com,sarlet Roger Merriman Y
Perhaps your husband voted on your behalf and didn't tell you.
chris French
Sara <sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk> writes
listed in the results.
No idea about Mark as I don't know which Mark he might be.
--
Chris French
Wm...
uk.net.news.config Sara <sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk>
[on some votes *possibly* not being counted or lost]
From the unnc POV the important bit is that the result is unambiguous.
If it had been close run I am certain Jon would have got out the UKV
metaphorical microscope and started examining individual votes. That
simply wasn't necessary in this case and being "not too fussed" is, IMO,
more appropriate than being disappointed considering that we are still
not sure what Pedt's circumstances are.
--
Wm...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days
chris French
<nos...@notnominet.name.invalid> writes
>On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:51:10 +0100, Mark
><i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
>
>>got the immpression that it would be counted after a discussion with
>>Pedt. (I initially voted through an anonymising email address but
>>revoted with my real address when my initial vote was rejected).
>
>been available to Jon when he took over the count, however unless
>there were 93 lost 'no' votes, the outcome would not have been
>affected.
>
>
True, but Mark says he made a further vote from a valid address which
was accepted. This should surely have been included in the votes that
Jon worked with. Are you sure it isn't on the vote list Mark?
It terms of the result it makes no difference. It might be an issue if
the vote has gone awol as that would might indicate some problem with
the vote recording process.
--
Chris French
Mark
<blth...@ckdog.co.uk> wrote:
>On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:36:57 +0100, Mark
><i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>Did you miss the bit about Pedt having disappeared? No one knows what
>>>has happened to him.
>>
>>This was before he disappeared and I would have expected in any case
>>my vote not to have been "lost". Other votes have been counted, why
>>not mine? My corrected vote was sent to the correct email address and
>>I got a formal acknowledgement.
>
><shrug> Difficult circumstances, what would you suggest we do?
I was not suggesting that any action be taken, except perhaps for the
votetakers to ensure that this cannot happen again.
Mark
wrote:
No. I wouldn't have complained that my vote was not counted it it had
been!
Sara
Paul Rudin <paul....@rudin.co.uk> wrote:
So it was! I didn't read the whole thing, sorry for being a twit. And I
am indeed listed. Hurrah.
D.M. Procida
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:51:10 +0100, Mark
> <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
>
> >>I hope it will work out for the best.
> >
> >I do admit to be disappointed, however, that my vote was rejected. I
> >got the immpression that it would be counted after a discussion with
> >Pedt. (I initially voted through an anonymising email address but
> >revoted with my real address when my initial vote was rejected).
>
>
> Did you miss the bit about Pedt having disappeared? No one knows what
> has happened to him.
Surely someone has his phone number, or knows his address, or something?
Presumably, what has happened is something fairly serious.
Daniele
Geoff Berrow
real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
>> Did you miss the bit about Pedt having disappeared? No one knows what
>> has happened to him.
>
>Surely someone has his phone number, or knows his address, or something?
Yes they do but apparently all efforts have drawn a blank. It is very
worrying.
Wm...
uk.net.news.config John the R-T <malap...@heypete.com>
[uk.rec.cycling added back in as Sara may be reading from there]
>On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:07:48 +0100, Paul Rudin wrote:
>
>> First post of this Fred.
Shouldn't be necessary for me to say but just in case Fred => thread
>But only if you subscribe to uk.net.news.config
>
>Followup set to unnc
That isn't very useful. The RESULT was posted to
===
uk.net.news.announce, uk.net.news.config, uk.rec.cycling
===
so PaulR's advice was correct if Sara follows any of those groups and
she must be following at least one of them if you think about it.
Paul Rudin
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:07:48 +0100, Paul Rudin wrote:
>
>> First post of this Fred.
>
> But only if you subscribe to uk.net.news.config
Hmm - from here it looks like the first post of the thread was made with
newsgroups: "uk.net.news.announce, uk.net.news.config, uk.rec.cycling".
Adam Funk
> Thank you, Jon, for taking over and producing a clear set of results in
> a fairly short period of time.
Same from me.
> I very much hope that we eventually hear that Pedt is OK.
So do I.
Adam Funk
> In article <result-uk.rec.cycling.moderated-20090921182538$10...@gradwell.net>,
> Jon Ribbens <j.ri...@ukvoting.org.uk> wrote:
>>RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
>>Summary: Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated
>>Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated PASSES 128:24
>
> Thanks very much, Jon, for quickly picking this up. And thanks to
> everyone who voted and helped out with the discussion and of course to
> the moderation panel.
>
> I'll blow the dust off the moderation machinery (which is mostly set
> up) and figure out what the next steps are, tomorrow. I'm going to
> share technical control of the moderation machinery with co-moderator
> David Damerell; this will help as I'm going to be away for a week
> starting this coming Saturday (and of course in general help provide
> cover when either of us is unavailable).
I'd like to thank you and everyone else who got this going, as well as
all the other people who voted in favour.
> I look forward to seeing the success of the new group.
So do I, of course!
Sara
"Wm..." <tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote:
> Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:27:32 <6eufd0d7xg7f$.1ii7xywgxduee$.d...@40tude.net>
> uk.net.news.config John the R-T <malap...@heypete.com>
>
> [uk.rec.cycling added back in as Sara may be reading from there]
>
> >On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:07:48 +0100, Paul Rudin wrote:
> >
> >> First post of this Fred.
>
> Shouldn't be necessary for me to say but just in case Fred => thread
That's OK - I worked that one out!
>
> >But only if you subscribe to uk.net.news.config
> >
> >Followup set to unnc
>
> That isn't very useful. The RESULT was posted to
> ===
> uk.net.news.announce, uk.net.news.config, uk.rec.cycling
> ===
> so PaulR's advice was correct if Sara follows any of those groups and
> she must be following at least one of them if you think about it.
I subscribe to the latter two. The first of which only since the
moderated group was proposed, but as it's been quite interesting I'll
probably keep lurking there.
Mr Benn
"Geoff Berrow" <blth...@ckdog.co.uk> wrote in message
news:j8dhb5hge98osl589...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 12:20:42 +0100,
> real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
>
>>> Did you miss the bit about Pedt having disappeared? No one knows what
>>> has happened to him.
>>
>>Surely someone has his phone number, or knows his address, or something?
>
> Yes they do but apparently all efforts have drawn a blank. It is very
> worrying.
Someone who knows Pedt should contact the police.
Wm...
<saramerriman-39C5...@news.individual.net>
uk.net.news.config Sara <sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk>
Wm:
>> That isn't very useful. The RESULT was posted to
>> ===
>> uk.net.news.announce, uk.net.news.config, uk.rec.cycling
>> ===
>> so PaulR's advice was correct if Sara follows any of those groups and
>> she must be following at least one of them if you think about it.
>
>I subscribe to the latter two. The first of which only since the
>moderated group was proposed, but as it's been quite interesting I'll
>probably keep lurking there.
Stick around, nothing will happen for months and then something
interesting happens like the helichopter will need oiling and Martyn
goes on a biscuit and purple paint strike.
That is infra purple paint BTW, not many people have access to it.
Mr Benn
news:v1rmo6x...@news.ducksburg.com...
> On 2009-09-21, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> I look forward to seeing the success of the new group.
>
> So do I, of course!
Hopefully it will give the militant cyclists some sanctuary and leave us
normal cyclists to use uk.rec.cycling. Assuming the militants keep to the
moderated group which I suspect they won't.
Mark
<newspos...@familyfrench.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <4nahb5thb437t1su4...@4ax.com>, . m
><nos...@notnominet.name.invalid> writes
>>On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:51:10 +0100, Mark
>><i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>I do admit to be disappointed, however, that my vote was rejected. I
>>>got the immpression that it would be counted after a discussion with
>>>Pedt. (I initially voted through an anonymising email address but
>>>revoted with my real address when my initial vote was rejected).
>>
>>It was inevitable that any discussions directly with Pedt may not have
>>been available to Jon when he took over the count, however unless
>>there were 93 lost 'no' votes, the outcome would not have been
>>affected.
>>
>>
>True, but Mark says he made a further vote from a valid address which
>was accepted. This should surely have been included in the votes that
>Jon worked with. Are you sure it isn't on the vote list Mark?
Absolutely sure. I have checked through it several times (and once
more again now just in case). It only shows my rejected vote (the
first in the list).
>It terms of the result it makes no difference. It might be an issue if
>the vote has gone awol as that would might indicate some problem with
>the vote recording process.
I agree it makes no difference to the result but I would be concerned
if there was a fundamental problem with the voting processes, like a
US presidential election ;-)
Graham Drabble
news:vmihb5hqr4kgt9gs6...@4ax.com:
> I agree it makes no difference to the result but I would be
> concerned if there was a fundamental problem with the voting
> processes, like a US presidential election ;-)
If you still have a copy of the ack then send it to John and the
committee and we can have a look.
1 vote either way isn't going to change the result so unless it looks
like we could have missed 90odd other votes the same way it won't delay
anything.
--
Graham Drabble
http://www.drabble.me.uk/
Wm...
<Xns9C8E999A167D4gr...@drabble.me.uk> uk.net.news.config
Graham Drabble <usen...@drabble.me.uk>
>On 22 Sep 2009 Mark <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote in
>news:vmihb5hqr4kgt9gs6...@4ax.com:
>
>> I agree it makes no difference to the result but I would be
>> concerned if there was a fundamental problem with the voting
>> processes, like a US presidential election ;-)
>
>If you still have a copy of the ack then send it to John and the
>committee and we can have a look.
Personally I wouldn't bother.
>1 vote either way isn't going to change the result so unless it looks
>like we could have missed 90odd other votes the same way it won't delay
>anything.
Some people, it appears, don't have sufficient fingers and toes.
Mark
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote:
>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:05:58
><Xns9C8E999A167D4gr...@drabble.me.uk> uk.net.news.config
>Graham Drabble <usen...@drabble.me.uk>
>
>>On 22 Sep 2009 Mark <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote in
>>news:vmihb5hqr4kgt9gs6...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> I agree it makes no difference to the result but I would be
>>> concerned if there was a fundamental problem with the voting
>>> processes, like a US presidential election ;-)
>>
>>If you still have a copy of the ack then send it to John and the
>>committee and we can have a look.
>
>Personally I wouldn't bother.
It's not IMHO. Just something to watch out for in the future.
Jon Ribbens
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 19:25:38 +0100, Jon Ribbens <j.ri...@ukvoting.org.uk>
> wrote:
>> YES beat NO by a majority of 104 votes. For group passage, there must be
>> 12 more YES votes than NO votes. Accordingly, the proposal PASSES.
>
> Great work Jon. The vote handling systems that allowed someone else to
> jump in and still generate results in a very few days is a tribute to the
> planning and improvements since the Committee election of 7 years ago.
Thankyou!
Wm...
uk.net.news.config Mark <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid>
>It's not IMHO. Just something to watch out for in the future.
We watch each other more carefully than you might think.
kat
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:55:02 +0100, "kat" <kat....@ntlworld.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Mark <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> said:
>>
>>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:19:05 +0100, Geoff Berrow
>>> <blth...@ckdog.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:51:10 +0100, Mark
>>>> <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> I hope it will work out for the best.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do admit to be disappointed, however, that my vote was rejected.
>>>>> I got the immpression that it would be counted after a discussion
>>>>> with Pedt. (I initially voted through an anonymising email
>>>>> address but revoted with my real address when my initial vote was
>>>>> rejected).
>>>>
>>>> Did you miss the bit about Pedt having disappeared? No one knows
>>>> what has happened to him.
>>>
>>> This was before he disappeared and I would have expected in any case
>>> my vote not to have been "lost". Other votes have been counted, why
>>> not mine? My corrected vote was sent to the correct email address
>>> and I got a formal acknowledgement.
>>
>> Is your corrected vote in the list of accepted votes?
>
> No. I wouldn't have complained that my vote was not counted it it had
> been!
You might have missed it, it was worth a check.
--
kat
>^..^<
Jon Ribbens
> This was before he disappeared and I would have expected in any case
> my vote not to have been "lost". Other votes have been counted, why
> not mine? My corrected vote was sent to the correct email address and
> I got a formal acknowledgement.
Do you mean you sent a vote to the @vote.ukvoting email address and
it isn't listed in the results at all? If so, please email me letting
me know the address you voted from (and if possible, the date and time
you sent it) and I'll have a look into it.
The @sneakemail vote being rejected is no slur against you by the way,
it is not an accusation of fraud or any sort of misbehaviour. If I had
been going through the usual process of contacting some voters
manually to clear up any queries then it may well have ended up being
counted, but given the circumstances I was trying to get a result out
quickly, and with the margin between YES and NO being so large it
seemed to me that it would have been a waste of everyone's time to
faff around further.
jms
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote:
>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 16:42:30 <p1shb55mfb3lc16ft...@4ax.com>
>uk.net.news.config Mark <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid>
>
>>It's not IMHO. Just something to watch out for in the future.
>
>We watch each other more carefully than you might think.
Ah yes - the pervert streak yet again.
I see you're now offering Chapman advice on how to bring up his kids.
RudiL
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
>
> Summary: Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated
>
> Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated PASSES 128:24
Thank you very much Jon. This is really excellent news. It is
fantastic to see that people interested in cycling and friendly banter
and chat between cyclists really do make up the majority of posters
(and lurkers) on the group, and that attempts to pervert the vote by
canvassing votes from groups that really shouldn't care whether or not
urcm is created failed miserably. Hopefully we will now have a group
like the urc of old, without the vile personal attacks.
Rudi
Wm...
uk.net.news.config jms <moderat...@live.co.uk>
Nope, I just happened to have met Guy and his son (church project), we
are ordinary people, unlike you. If a boy wants to see churches I don't
have a problem with that. London has a number of religious buildings of
many faiths and most of them are open to anyone who behaves well.
If Guy's boy asks any of the main religious groupings in London "Hello,
may I visit you?" I am pretty sure the answer will be yes.
Simon Brooke
> >> Did you miss the bit about Pedt having disappeared? No one knows what
> >> has happened to him.
>
> >Surely someone has his phone number, or knows his address, or something?
>
> Yes they do but apparently all efforts have drawn a blank. It is very
> worrying.
Well, Pedt, if you're out there reading this, many thanks for all your
hard work and I hope things are OK with you.
Wm...
<cc5a247a-20d9-4672...@v2g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
uk.net.news.config RudiL <rudi...@gmail.com>
That isn't under Jon's control, Rudi.
Wm...
uk.net.news.config . m <nos...@notnominet.name.invalid>
>On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:18:54 -0500, Jon Ribbens
><jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>but given the circumstances I was trying to get a result out
>>quickly, and with the margin between YES and NO being so large it
>>seemed to me that it would have been a waste of everyone's time to
>>faff around further.
>
>IMO the correct and logical strategy, and thanks again.
I thought I had already said this, I agree.
David Damerell
>I was not suggesting that any action be taken, except perhaps for the
>votetakers to ensure that this cannot happen again.
Mmm. That a complete hash has been made of the first group vote for _four
years_ [1] is not very encouraging.
[1] assuming ukvoting's Web pages are accurate.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Kill the tomato!
Yesterday was Tuesday, September.
Today is Wednesday, September.
Tomorrow will be Thursday, September.
Wm...
uk.net.news.config . m <nos...@notnominet.name.invalid>
>On 22 Sep 2009 20:33:32 +0100 (BST), David Damerell
><dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>
>>Mmm. That a complete hash has been made of the first group vote for _four
>>years_ [1] is not very encouraging.
>
>I'm completely at a loss as to how you can draw such a conclusion.
>
>The process was perfect and demonstrates that in the case of an
>undesirable and unexpected event, plans are in place for completion.
Quite. I see robustness.
Maybe DavidD is gnew to the idea of wot we have been donning for a
dec-ard or wots the ten year thing. Yes, I mean that.
Just zis Guy, you know?
<dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>That a complete hash has been made of the first group vote for _four
>years_ [1] is not very encouraging.
Hash? I would not say so. Anything that depends on a single
volunteer is at risk of the volunteer becoming unexpectedly
unavailable; when it became clear that this was the case another
volunteer stepped up to the plate.
There never was any deadline to meet.
Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc
Just zis Guy, you know?
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote:
>Nope, I just happened to have met Guy and his son (church project), we
>are ordinary people, unlike you. If a boy wants to see churches I don't
>have a problem with that. London has a number of religious buildings of
>many faiths and most of them are open to anyone who behaves well.
Peter's looking at the life of Robert Hooke, who designed The
Monument, several City churches for the Wren partnership and developed
the method of construction for the dome of St. Paul's, as well as
surveying London after the fire, laying out many widened streets,
developing the world's first set of building controls, and of course
also founded the science of microscopy, deduced that fossils were
petrified sea animals and plants, invented the anchor escapement and
the universal joint, and was Gresham Professor of Mathematics and
curator of experiments to the Royal Society, of which he was a founder
member and also at some time secretary. An extremely interesting and
much overlooked character from English history, second only to Newton
in his impact on the history of science (and that only because of the
immense impact of calculus).
We have rare books on Hooke and naturally looked at a few related
landmarks on the way round. I didn't get to St Edmund King & Martyr
but we did take a picture up the centre of the column of The Monument,
which doubles as a telescope.
I am sure all this is evil and sinister in some way that entirely
escapes me right now.
Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc
Wm...
uk.net.news.config "Just zis Guy, you know?" <guy.c...@spamcop.net>
>I am sure all this is evil and sinister in some way that entirely
>escapes me right now.
It will all be in a novel by a man named Brown soon, Dan, dan, dan.
Alan LeHun
spam.me.uk says...
> >If you still have a copy of the ack then send it to John and the
> >committee and we can have a look.
>
> Personally I wouldn't bother.
>
We should. If an ack has been received then his vote should have been
accessible to John when he took over.
A missing vote signifies a bug in the system which, although
insignificant in this case, could be more serious under a slightly
different set of circumstances. Any suggestion that a vote has
dissapeared should be investigated, imo.
Unless of course, you're of the pessimistic opinion that this was the
last great uk.* vote.
--
Alan LeHun
Wm...
uk.net.news.config Alan LeHun <t...@reply.to>
>In article <I+d02Zr0fOuKFwgf@[127.0.0.1]>, tcn...@blackhole.do-not-
>spam.me.uk says...
>> >If you still have a copy of the ack then send it to John and the
>> >committee and we can have a look.
>>
>> Personally I wouldn't bother.
>>
>
>We should. If an ack has been received then his vote should have been
>accessible to John when he took over.
Jon not John
>A missing vote signifies a bug in the system which, although
>insignificant in this case, could be more serious under a slightly
>different set of circumstances. Any suggestion that a vote has
>dissapeared should be investigated, imo.
I am sure UKV will examine their navels; guys, you don't want fluff in
that bit of your body when you meet a boy or girl you like.
>Unless of course, you're of the pessimistic opinion that this was the
>last great uk.* vote.
Quite the opposite. This vote says to me UKV is functioning very well.
David Damerell
><dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>That a complete hash has been made of the first group vote for _four
>>years_ [1] is not very encouraging.
>Hash? I would not say so. Anything that depends on a single
>volunteer is at risk of the volunteer becoming unexpectedly
>unavailable;
Yes, systems with an obvious single point of failure tend to go badly
wrong when it fails. That is a reason to eliminate obvious single points
of failure. For example, there is a deputy Control.
>There never was any deadline to meet.
It seems that over a hundred people wanted their new newsgroup; it was
delayed for several weeks, in spite of this being the only group creation
activity for four years. Let us hope in the next four years UKV can
improve their procedures.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Yesterday was Wednesday, September.
Today is Thursday, September.
Tomorrow will be Friday, September.
Wm...
uk.net.news.config David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
>It seems that over a hundred people wanted their new newsgroup; it was
>delayed for several weeks, in spite of this being the only group creation
>activity for four years. Let us hope in the next four years UKV can
>improve their procedures.
You are throwing meat at UKV?
Jon Ribbens
> It seems that over a hundred people wanted their new newsgroup; it was
> delayed for several weeks, in spite of this being the only group creation
> activity for four years. Let us hope in the next four years UKV can
> improve their procedures.
I do not think that the UKVoting procedures require any change.
James
It seems to me that David has a valid point. Sure, it is only usenet
and doesn't really matter, but it was only after several weeks of
patient waiting, followed by a few increasingly frustrated enquiries,
that anyone seemed to bother doing anything at all about the fact that
the official vote-taker had apparently gone AWOL for a month.
James
Just zis Guy, you know?
<dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>Yes, systems with an obvious single point of failure tend to go badly
>wrong when it fails. That is a reason to eliminate obvious single points
>of failure. For example, there is a deputy Control.
And in this case someone else picked up the ball. You appear to be
criticising them for not having a procedure to handle a situation
which has never come up before.
I don't think there are many Yes voters who are much more keen than me
to see the group created, but I don't find the delay as much of a
problem as you seem to.
Doug
wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 19:25:38 +0100, Jon Ribbens
>
>
> [uk.rec.cycling put back into the NG line. It is customary to warn
> posters if follow-ups have been set]
>
> >RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
>
> >Summary: Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated
>
> >Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated PASSES 128:24
>
>
Why would somebody who is not the slightest bit interested in a
censored newsgroup bother to vote? Wouldn't this fact skew the vote in
its favour anyway?
--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
One man's newsgroup is another man's censorship.
Geoff Berrow
<dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>It seems that over a hundred people wanted their new newsgroup; it was
>delayed for several weeks, in spite of this being the only group creation
>activity for four years. Let us hope in the next four years UKV can
>improve their procedures.
Feel free to volunteer to help.
As far as I am concerned the system worked as designed and I am very
disappointed that you feel the need to make these remarks especially
when we are not in possession of all the facts.
--
Geoff Berrow
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Put thecat out to email
Ian Smith
On Tue, 22 Sep, Just zis Guy, you know? <guy.c...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:52:53 +0100, "Wm..."
> <tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote:
>
> >Nope, I just happened to have met Guy and his son (church project), we
> >are ordinary people, unlike you. If a boy wants to see churches I don't
> >have a problem with that. London has a number of religious buildings of
> >many faiths and most of them are open to anyone who behaves well.
>
> Peter's looking at the life of Robert Hooke, who designed The
> Monument, several City churches for the Wren partnership and developed
> the method of construction for the dome of St. Paul's, as well as
> surveying London after the fire, laying out many widened streets,
> developing the world's first set of building controls, and of course
> also founded the science of microscopy, deduced that fossils were
> petrified sea animals and plants, invented the anchor escapement and
> the universal joint, and was Gresham Professor of Mathematics and
> curator of experiments to the Royal Society, of which he was a founder
> member and also at some time secretary. An extremely interesting and
> much overlooked character from English history, second only to Newton
> in his impact on the history of science (and that only because of the
> immense impact of calculus).
Yeah. No-one has ever heard of him. They should make a law about it,
and teach it in physics. Maybe we could make it something to do with
springs.
He also, incidently, published the first solution to the problem of
optimising the geometry of arches. Though for some reason, he first
published it in an appendix to a paper on helioscopes, in latin and
with the letters shuffled into alphabetical order.
regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
Brendan Halpin
> Tue, 22 Sep 2009 22:45:03
> <lvgib59kuvp3fgkvk...@4ax.com> uk.net.news.config
> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <guy.c...@spamcop.net>
>
>>I am sure all this is evil and sinister in some way that entirely
>>escapes me right now.
>
> It will all be in a novel by a man named Brown soon, Dan, dan, dan.
It's already all in a novel (rather, a trilogy) by Neal Stephenson (the
"Baroque Cycle"). Great fun, if you like that sort of thing.
Brendan
--
Brendan Halpin, Department of Sociology, University of Limerick, Ireland
Tel: w +353-61-213147 f +353-61-202569 h +353-61-338562; Room F2-025 x 3147
mailto:brendan...@ul.ie http://www.ul.ie/sociology/brendan.halpin.html
Mark
<jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk> wrote:
>On 2009-09-22, Mark <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
>> This was before he disappeared and I would have expected in any case
>> my vote not to have been "lost". Other votes have been counted, why
>> not mine? My corrected vote was sent to the correct email address and
>> I got a formal acknowledgement.
>
>Do you mean you sent a vote to the @vote.ukvoting email address and
>it isn't listed in the results at all? If so, please email me letting
>me know the address you voted from (and if possible, the date and time
>you sent it) and I'll have a look into it.
I sent the corrected vote to the query address as requested by Pedt.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
[Reply-to address valid until it is spammed.]
Ian Jackson
.m <nos...@notnominet.name> wrote:
>On 22 Sep 2009 20:33:32 +0100 (BST), David Damerell
><dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>Mmm. That a complete hash has been made of the first group vote for _four
>>years_ [1] is not very encouraging.
>
I think David is referring to the long delays at many stages of the
process and particularly in counting the votes. My first email to
Control was on the 20th of May, _over four months ago_.
I have counted up where the time went. Of these four months so far[1]:
* 9 days were spent by me
* 5 days were spent by the proposed moderation panel
* 13 days were spent on public discussion in unnc and urc
* 13 days were spent by Control
* 33 days were spent by the first VT before he went missing
* 11 days were due directly to the first VT going missing
* 13 days were then spent by UKVoting and/or the replacement VT
* 32 days were a consequence of rules in the Guidelines
Or to look at it another way:
* 27 days for people and discussion associated with the proposed group
* 24 days due to the exceptional event of the VT going missing
* 78 days for the USENET UK establishment
Or to look at it another way, given that the useful discussion had
finished by the 25th of June:
* 35 days to come up with a good proposal
* 95 days to vote on it
Personally I think it's absurd that it can take over four months to
create a moderated newsgroup which (as evidenced by the vote) is so
badly needed.
[1] This count includes events up to the end of the 5-day post-results
waiting period, and assumes that the group will be created on the
26th of September. There was quite a bit of manual adding-up so I
may be a day or two off.
--
Ian Jackson personal email: <ijac...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
These opinions are my own. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ijackson/
PGP2 key 1024R/0x23f5addb, fingerprint 5906F687 BD03ACAD 0D8E602E FCF37657
Adam Funk
> Quoting Just zis Guy, you know? <guy.c...@spamcop.net>:
>>There never was any deadline to meet.
>
> It seems that over a hundred people wanted their new newsgroup; it was
> delayed for several weeks, in spite of this being the only group creation
> activity for four years. Let us hope in the next four years UKV can
> improve their procedures.
I have to admit, I was pleasantly surprised that over a hundred people
wanted it. The delay of several weeks wasn't that significant
compared to the delays that the usual suspects were trying to create
with petty objections and canvassing.
Keitht
And?
It's not as if anyone is being paid for this work, the world will not
end due to a small delay of an unspecified timescale for completion.
Eventually the vote was asked for then counted.
The system works but just not as fast as some might have wished.
What do people want ferferksake? John Snow and his swingometer?
Anyway it was all supposed to be rigged and everything held under total
control of HAL -- sorry Chiark-- to ensure the vote went the way it was
supposed to as apparently everyone involved were all chummy.
Deep Thought has spoken and this time the answer wasn't 42 so the
question must have been the right one at last. Like Deep Thought, it's
just taken a while.
So, when's the celebratory CM/peloton/primary position pedants ride?
--
Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.
kat
The first group proposal in which I was involved took over 3 months from
first RFD to creation; that was without exceptional events of missing vote
takers, and doesn't include the time taken for discussion by the people
involved prior to requesting the RFD, or any time that was taken discussing
it with Control before posting. It seemed ridiculously long to me then, but
now I see why.
There will always be time taken for discussion, there are rules to allow for
time for everyone to take part. Ditto if a vote is required, again, there
will be an apparently long time for people to vote as not everyone can do it
the moment the CFV is out.
Every vote is different. This one had a high turn out, and we can assume
Pedt did take the trouble to verify votes and voters, as there had been
suggestions that there could be improper canvassing, and vote fraud. There
will always be a short delay between the publication of the result, and the
creation, to allow us all to review the result and object if we have cause
to believe there is a problem. As Jon has just given us the result without
more than a cursory check that there appears to be nothing that could afect
the result, it isn't surprising there is at least one query.
On top of that every one involved is a volunteer doing this in their spare
time. They take holidays, they get sick ( we know Pedt got sick), real life
kicks in.
But then, you know all this, don't you.
--
kat
>^..^<
Keitht
> On 21 Sep, 19:43, Tom Crispin <kije.rem...@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge>
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 19:25:38 +0100, Jon Ribbens
>>
>> <j.ribb...@ukvoting.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>> [uk.rec.cycling put back into the NG line. It is customary to warn
>> posters if follow-ups have been set]
>>
>>> RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
>>> Summary: Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated
>>> Create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated PASSES 128:24
>> I hope the new group succeeds.
>>
> Why would somebody who is not the slightest bit interested in a
> censored newsgroup bother to vote? Wouldn't this fact skew the vote in
> its favour anyway?
>
We have been informed that all the 'fuckwits' will clear off and leave
urc to 'sensible' people. To that end it is important for urcm to be
created or then 'fuckwits' won't fuck off.
That it gives the 'fuckwits' somewhere cosy to sit and pop in to urc to
feed the flames now and then is a bonus.
Jon Ribbens
>>Do you mean you sent a vote to the @vote.ukvoting email address and
>>it isn't listed in the results at all? If so, please email me letting
>>me know the address you voted from (and if possible, the date and time
>>you sent it) and I'll have a look into it.
>
> I sent the corrected vote to the query address as requested by Pedt.
OK thanks, that does explain why I didn't have a copy of it, and
hence why it was not in the results. Apologies for that.
Jon Ribbens
> When reading about the experience of Mark it appears possible that the
> votetaker may have been engaged in some out-of-channel correspondence that
> never have reached the backup systems. That may not show any failing in
> the procedures but perhaps a human failure to follow them. Anyway it does
> seem sufficiently interesting to make an investigation by UKV into his
> missing vote worthwhile.
Indeed. Mark has now said that Pedt asked him to send the ballot paper
directly to him, which resolves the mystery. All ballot papers should
of course always be sent to the @vote.ukvoting address, and Pedt
shouldn't really have asked him to send it directly.
The lack of recording of emails sent directly between the votetaker
and voters is unfortunate, but I don't think there's anything that
can be done in practice about that that wouldn't be more cumbersome
than beneficial.
Ian Jackson
.m <nos...@notnominet.name> wrote:
>In terms of good governance you have to expect delays. You caused a
>number of these initially by not listening to the advice given to you.
Please explain exactly what delays I caused by not listening to
correct advice. Feel free to quote any emails between me and the
committee, if you grant me the same courtesy.
>It's a process, not a race, and the process, overall, is not broken.
4 months to create a badly-needed group is broken.
Wm...
uk.net.news.config Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com>
It does expose a rather large hole in the jms / nuxx scheme of things
doesn't it?
Motorists were meant to flock in and vote against. They didn't.
Perhaps cyclists and motorists get on better than some might think. I,
a cyclist, don't have a problem with motorists in general and presume
vice versa.