RFD: rec.arts.tv.barney.{criticism,creative}
JD Marburger
REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
This is the 2nd formal Request For Discussion (RFD) on the
subject of creating two unmoderated Usenet Newsgroups,
rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism and rec.arts.tv.barney.creative. The first
RFD was cancelled due to the proponent's net access problems and time
limitations.
RATIONALE: rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
Several newsgroups in the alt.* hierarchy relating to criticism of
the children's television show "Barney and Friends", including alt.tv.barney
and alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die, have been in existence for over five
years with a typical, combined traffic of 200+ posts per day, the
majority of which are on alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die.(1)
It has been proposed that discussion of the negative points of the
show be moved to an alternate group several times.
Alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die (ab4d for short) contains both traffic on RL
criticism of the show, and a "shared-reality" RPG, along with humorous and
fictional material relating to Barney the Dinosaur(2). There has been
complaints about both being on the newsgroup simultaneously; also,
persons on alt.tv.barney have complained about apparent "shared-reality",
humorous and/or parodic posts ending up on their newsgroup.
In addition, in January of 1996 several of the "Barney newsgroups"
were rmgrouped by a forged rmgroup and a mistaken backup rmgroup. Attempts
to re-newgroup by "trusted" alt.* newgroupers were not entirely successful,
and it was suggested on alt.config that (due to the inability to re-newgroup
and the traffic of the groups pre-rmgroup) an attempt should be made to move
to a new group in the Big Eight hierarchies.
Hence, the group rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism is being created for
the serious discussion and criticism of "Barney and Friends".
CHARTER: rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
An unmoderated newsgroup which would provide a forum for the
discussion and debate of potentially negative aspects of the television show
"Barney and Friends". Example topics of discussion would include:
* The potential for harm to emotional maturity presented in the show
* Potentially objectionable/harmful material in the show
* Debate on the educational merit of "Barney and Friends"
* Concerns from parents, academics, and others about the nature of the show.
To supply such a forum for discussion free of "role-play" or
flammage, and thus allow one to find posts of interest more easily.
To reduce the volume of posts on extant "Barney groups" in the alt.*
hierarchy on sites still receiving the "Barney groups", and provide a forum
for those whose access was removed in the rmgroup and which has not been
restored by the newgroup by Grobe, et. al.
"Pro-Barney" posts are not discouraged, as long as the person is
posting such for purposes of debate and not for flammage.
END CHARTER.
RATIONALE: rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
There has been a five-year tradition on Usenet of stories on the newsgroup
alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die in a "shared-reality" universe, in which
a band of fighters known as the Jihad Against Barney have fought against
the purple dinosaur and its minions. The group has been mentioned in
Time and Playboy in the past, and (until a recent rmgroup and not entirely
successful newgroup recently) was receiving upwards of 200+ posts a day.
Furthermore, there has been a long history of other humorous and
other creative postings regarding Barney, including ASCII art, stories not
necessarily related to a shared-reality setting, discussion of
alterations to games including Barney (such as the BarneyDOOM WAD file,
or the BBS door game BarneySplat), parodies of the theme song, etc. on ab4d.
Alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die contains, in addition to the shared-reality
world of the Jihad and the humor posts, a fair amount of RL discussion on
how Barney may be harmful in "real life" settings. There has been
complaint about both being on the newsgroup simultaneously; also,
persons on alt.tv.barney have complained about apparent "shared-reality",
fictional, and/or humor posts ending up on their newsgroup.
As mentioned earlier, alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die was partially rmgrouped
at the beginning of this year.
Hence, the group rec.arts.tv.barney.creative is being created for the
discussion and posts of creative works relating to, or in parody of, the
television show "Barney and Friends".
CHARTER: rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
An unmoderated newsgroup which would provide a forum for the
discussion and posting of creative works relating to, or in parody of,
Barney the Dinosaur. This will specifically include shared-reality roleplay
and fictional stories.
Example topics will include:
* Original stories from the Jihad to Destroy Barney the Purple DInosaur's
shared-reality universe. As well, other stories involving Barney, but not
part of the Jihad Universe are welcome. Other samples of posts could
include: parodies, lengthy group-authored epics, poems, essays, plays,
soap operas(3), and other styles of writing.
* Administrivia of the shared-reality universe such as discussions on
conventions(4), creation of fictional weaponry(5), and other background
information.
* Discussion of parodic or other fictional works involving Barney. This
specifically includes reviews of software, game patches(6), art work, and
similar creative efforts.
* Humorous articles relating to Barney the Dinosaur
* Any other posts relating to Barney the Dinosaur that are not specifically
covered under rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism (please see the charter for
rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism).
This newsgroup is to be created for the following reasons:
- To separate "shared-reality" and "role-play" posts from serious
discussion in the alt.* hierarchy.(7) This will allow for
readers to
locate the topic of their interest much easier.
- To reduce the volume of posts on extant "Barney groups" in the
alt.* hierarchy at sites which still carry them.
- To provide an area for discussion for those individuals without
access to the alt.* newsgroups.(8)
END CHARTER.
PROCEDURE:
This message initiates a discussion period to consider the creation
of rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism and rec.arts.tv.barney.creative. Discussion
will take place on news.groups. If discussions are made in other newsgroups,
they should always be cross-posted to news.groups.
* This is not a call for votes. Please do not attempt to vote now. A call
for votes (CFV) will be issued approximately 4 weeks after this RFD. When the
CFV is posted, there will be instructions on how to mail your votes to the
independent vote-taker.
DISTRIBUTION:
This RFD is in accordance with the Guidelines for Newsgroups
Creation, and has been cross-posted to the following relevant
newsgroups:
news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die,
alt.tv.barney,alt.tv.criticism,alt.tv.dinosaurs.barney.die.die.die
This RFD has also been forwarded to a private announcements mailinglist
for the Jihad Against Barney <address withheld by request>.
Proponent: JD Marburger aka DeadLock the Feral(NYAR!) <cybr...@infinet.com>
Mentors: J. FoxGlov, <fox...@ksu.edu>
David Hibbs, <mid...@iastate.edu>
Footnotes:
(1) The subject of said role-play is not Barney the purple dinosaur as
produced, manufactured, and copyrighted by the Lyons Corporation, but
b'harnii a magenta, heavily scaled, sword wielding demon intent on enslaving
the universe.
(21) Prior is the rmgroup attempts of January, traffic routinely hit the 200
post per day. After the rmgroups and partially successful newgroups, traffic
has become erratic and widely varied from newserver to newserver. Checks at
places like dejanews.com and zippo.com often reveal large numbers of articles
that are never seen by newsgroup subscribers.
For example, my ISP, infinet.com, gets a news feed from mci.net and
(I believe) uunet.net as well as a third source. I routinely experience
difficulty finding people's post on ab4d despite the presence of two
backbones.
(3) "As the Plushy Burns" is a Jihad-created soap opera that involves several
trolls in ab4d playing the roles of drag queens in a complex, humorous
sitcom. The story came about because several males assumed a female name and
began posting to ab4d. Someone remarked: "What is this? A sponge minion
drag show?" and thus the soap opera started.
(4) Conventions in the Jihad's shared-reality universe are typically
expressed in Corollaries to something known as The ThreeFold Truth.
(5) Example of fictional weaponry include: The BurgerMasterBlaster[tm] which
turns sponge minions, a type of barney follower, into a double BigMac with
your choice of condiments. (You have to set the gun beforehand for what
types you want.)
(6) Sample patches include: Quake 'skins' where players in DeathMatch can
assume the appearance of Barney, DOOM series .wad files, and other modifiable
games. Games have included things like BarneySplat!, Purple Dinosaur
Massacre, and many other things.
Please note, the posting of binaries, except in very special
circumstances, has been Strongly discouraged throughout the Jihad's and
ab4d's history. Binary posts are very rarely, if ever, are made by members
of the Jihad -- the convention is to place things on the WWW and post as
advertisement w/ URL for newsgroup readers to download. Where appropriate,
binaries may be post to alt.binaries.* groups.
(7) Persons wishing to play pro-Barney characters in the shared-reality
universes are not discouraged from doing so, so long as they follow the
established conventions and rules.
(8) For example, many US Universities and smaller ISPs have stopped carrying
the alt.* hierarchy completely due to its explosive growth both in legitimate
posts and spam/velveeta.
bill...@primenet.com
LAST CALL FOR VOTES (of 2)
unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
Newsgroups line:
rec.arts.tv.barney.creative Shared Reality inspired by Barney and Friends.
rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism Criticism of the TV show Barney and Friends.
Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC, 7 Feb 1997.
This vote is being conducted by a neutral third party. Questions about
the proposed group should be directed to the proponent(s).
Proponent: J.D. Marburger <cybr...@infinet.com>
Proponent: David Hibbs <mid...@iastate.edu>
Proponent: J. FoxGlov <fox...@ksu.edu>
Mentor: none
Votetaker: Jeremy Billones <bill...@primenet.com>
RATIONALE: rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
Several newsgroups in the alt.* hierarchy relating to criticism of
the children's television show "Barney and Friends", including
alt.tv.barney and alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die, have been in existence
for over five years with a typical, combined traffic of 200+ posts per
day, the majority of which are on alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die. It has
been proposed that discussion of the negative points of the show be moved
to an alternate group several times due to conflicts with the shared-
reality conversation in the same NGs. In addition, in January of 1996
several of the "Barney newsgroups" were rmgrouped by a forged rmgroup and
a mistaken backup rmgroup. Attempts to re-newgroup by "trusted" alt.*
newgroupers were not entirely successful, and it was suggested on
alt.config that (due to the inability to re-newgroup and the traffic of
the groups pre-rmgroup) an attempt should be made to move to a new group
in the Big Eight hierarchies.
Hence, the group rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism is being created for
the serious discussion and criticism of "Barney and Friends".
RATIONALE: rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
There has been a five-year tradition on Usenet of stories on the
newsgroup alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die in a "shared-reality" universe,
in which a band of fighters known as the Jihad Against Barney have fought
against the purple dinosaur and its minions. The group has been mentioned
in Time and Playboy in the past, and (until a recent rmgroup and not
entirely successful newgroup recently) was receiving upwards of 200+ posts
a day. Furthermore, there has been a long history of other humorous and
other creative postings regarding Barney, including ASCII art, stories not
necessarily related to a shared-reality setting, discussion of
alterations to games including Barney (such as the BarneyDOOM WAD file,
or the BBS door game BarneySplat), parodies of the theme song, etc. on
ab4d. Alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die contains, in addition to the shared-
reality world of the Jihad and the humor posts, a fair amount of RL
discussion on how Barney may be harmful in "real life" settings. There
has been complaint about both being on the newsgroup simultaneously; also,
persons on alt.tv.barney have complained about apparent "shared-reality",
fictional, and/or humor posts ending up on their newsgroup.
Hence, the group rec.arts.tv.barney.creative is being created for
the discussion and posts of creative works relating to, or in parody of,
the television show "Barney and Friends".
CHARTER: rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
An unmoderated newsgroup which would provide a forum for the
discussion and debate of potentially negative aspects of the television
show "Barney and Friends". Example topics of discussion would include:
* The potential for harm to emotional maturity presented in the show
* Potentially objectionable/harmful material in the show
* Debate on the educational merit of "Barney and Friends"
* Concerns from parents, academics, and others about the nature of the
show.
To supply such a forum for discussion free of "role-play" or
flammage, and thus allow one to find posts of interest more easily.
To reduce the volume of posts on extant "Barney groups" in the
alt.* hierarchy on sites still receiving the "Barney groups", and provide
a forum for those whose access was removed in the rmgroup and which has
not been restored by the newgroup by Grobe, et. al.
"Pro-Barney" posts are not discouraged, as long as the person is
posting such for purposes of debate and not for flammage.
END CHARTER.
CHARTER: rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
An unmoderated newsgroup which would provide a forum for the
discussion and posting of creative works relating to, or in parody of,
Barney the Dinosaur. This will specifically include shared-reality
roleplay and fictional stories.
Example topics will include:
* Original stories from the Jihad to Destroy Barney the Purple DInosaur's
shared-reality universe. As well, other stories involving Barney, but
not part of the Jihad Universe are welcome. Other samples of posts
could include: parodies, lengthy group-authored epics, poems, essays,
plays, soap operas, and other styles of writing.
* Administrivia of the shared-reality universe such as discussions on
conventions, creation of fictional weaponry, and other background
information.
* Discussion of parodic or other fictional works involving Barney. This
specifically includes reviews of software, game patches, art work,
and similar creative efforts.
* Humorous articles relating to Barney the Dinosaur
* Any other posts relating to Barney the Dinosaur that are not
specifically covered under rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism (please see the
charter for rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism).
This newsgroup is to be created for the following reasons:
- To separate "shared-reality" and "role-play" posts from serious
discussion in the alt.* hierarchy. This will allow for
readers to locate the topic of their interest much easier.
- To reduce the volume of posts on extant "Barney groups" in the
alt.* hierarchy at sites which still carry them.
- To provide an area for discussion for those individuals without
access to the alt.* newsgroups.
END CHARTER.
HOW TO VOTE
Erase everything above the top "-=-=-=-" line and erase everything
below the bottom "-=-=-=-" line. Do not erase anything between these
lines and do not change the group names.
For each group, place a YES or NO in the brackets next to it to vote for
or against it. If you don't want to vote on a particular group, just leave
the space blank. Don't worry about spacing of the columns or any quote
characters (">") that your reply inserts.
Send MAIL to: vot...@clark.net
Just Replying should work if you are not reading this on a mailing list.
-=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
rec.arts.tv.barney Ballot <RATB-0001> (Don't remove this marker)
Give your real name here:
[Your Vote] Group
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[ ] rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
[ ] rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
-=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
You may also ABSTAIN in place of YES/NO - this will not affect the outcome.
Anything else may be rejected by the automatic vote counting program. The
votetaker will respond to your received ballots with a personal acknowledge-
ment by mail - if you do not receive one within several days, try again.
It's your responsibility to make sure your vote is registered correctly.
One vote counted per person, no more than one per account. Addresses and
votes of all voters will be published in the final voting results list.
VOTING PROCEDURE NOTES:
Standard Guidelines for voting apply. One person, one vote.
Votes must be mailed directly from the voter to the votetaker.
Anonymous, forwarded or proxy votes are not valid; this includes
votes generated by WWW/HTML/CGI forms.
Vote counting is automated. Failure to follow these directions will
mean that your vote does not get counted. Duplicate votes are
resolved in favor of the most recent valid vote. Addresses and votes
of all voters will be published in the final voting results post.
The purpose of a Usenet vote is to determine the genuine interest of
persons who would read a proposed newsgroup. Soliciting votes from
disinterested parties defeats this purpose. Please do not
redistribute this CFV. If you must, direct people to the official CFV
as posted to news.announce.newgroups. Distributing pre-marked or
otherwise edited copies of this CFV will result in those votes being
cancelled. When in doubt, ask the votetaker.
Common errors include quoting the entire article and sending your vote
to the vote-takers personal address. Either of these two could result
in your vote not being counted.
DISTRIBUTION:
This CFV has been posted to the following newsgroups:
news.announce.newgroups,news.groups
alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die
alt.tv.barney
alt.tv.the-jihad
rec.arts.tv.barney.{criticism,creative} Mass Ack
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
afa...@umich.edu Andrew Fabbro
afn2...@afn.org Follower of the Clawed Albino
airc...@concentric.net Michal Douglas
aj...@skycorp.net Ajit Deshpande
al...@yfn.ysu.edu Tina M. Wood
alex...@iastate.edu Alexia Bellinghausen
ar...@iastate.edu Arnold R. Cowan
ASCI...@delphi.com Austin Seraphin
aste...@pacific.telebyte.com Amber Stevens (aste...@pacific.telebyte.com
bab...@writeme.com Peter Buchy
bcb...@ix.netcom.com Brian Bull
ben...@ACS1.BU.EDU Benjamin Hiltunen
Bi...@wishin.com Michael
bla...@pacificrim.net Blain Nelson
bo...@datasync.com Martin H. Booda
bre...@cc3.adams.edu Sean M. Breen
bwc...@acs.ucalgary.ca B. Cooke
c...@sava.gulfnet.com John McKellar
Cron...@aol.com Doug Scheinberg
cvic...@internorth.com Charlene Vickers
cyo...@tezcat.com
dan...@gold-link.com Patrick McCarthy
dark...@seanet.com Kirk J Felton
dead...@one.net JD Marburger
dead...@cats.ucsc.edu David Brogden
Dea...@deanie.demon.co.uk Dean Smith
dha...@hal-pc.org David L. Hanson
djenk...@aol.com Darrel Jenkins II
dl...@skycorp.net Danny Lis
donk...@polarnet.com Don Kiely
d...@ihug.co.nz David Farrar
dur...@best.com Bryant Durrell
DW...@bofh.mi.org Daniel George Wood
e...@twin-cities.com ed "love that barney" bertsch
en...@postoffice.ptd.net Paul DeSanto (UpLink Station Boomer)
eric_w...@MENTORG.COM Eric Williams
es...@inconnect.com Christopher Estep
fai...@guinan.aero.org Daniel P. Faigin
ferg...@dial.pipex.com Fergus O Connell
flam...@hotmail.com Aris Merquoni
fo...@mail.bayside.net Ed Murphy
fox...@ksu.ksu.edu-nospam J.
Frances...@williams.edu F. Gomes (Lt. Comm. Jaina, TRES Corps)
fra...@dgne.com Frank Gerratana
Gal...@cris.com Stephen D. Scott
gcha...@irus.rri.uwo.ca Greg Chapman
geda...@panix.com Gedaliah Friedenberg
gold...@primenet.com Cheryl Payne
gre...@microsoft.com Greg Franklin
han...@hg.uleth.ca Edward Dinacci
heil...@math.berkeley.edu Stephan Heilmayr
hh...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu Jim Baranovich
high...@iastate.edu Christopher Landmark
HYAT...@aol.com Amy Hyatt
hype...@concentric.net Michael Davis
JADC...@ARTSU1.watstar.uwaterloo.ca Doug Corti
ja...@hermes.cam.ac.uk June Linden
ja...@cwo.com Keith Adams
jay...@concentric.net Jay Lapidus
jbu...@ksu.edu Jennifer A. Burdoo
jclai...@earthlink.net Justin Clairmont
je...@server1.milagro.com.blacksburg.va.us Jesus Eugenio Sanchez
j...@kamens.brookline.ma.us Jonathan Kamens
jim...@pipeline.com Jim Riley
JJR...@ACS.TAMU.EDU
jlow...@pwa.acusd.edu John Lowther
j...@drum.msfc.nasa.gov J. Porter Clark
jpim...@nectech.com John Pimentel
jter...@nbnet.nb.ca James Terhune
jwa...@acpub.duke.edu James C. Wagner Jr.
kah...@panix.com Andy Finkenstadt
Kaos...@concentric.net Karl Browning
ka...@rigel.econ.uga.edu Kate Wrightson
ka...@cicero.spc.uchicago.edu Katharine Weizel
kee...@wco.com Brian Matthews
ke...@sun1.uconect.net Keili
ki...@vcn.bc.ca Greg Webster
ki...@netcom.com Kim DeVaughn
kort...@cps.msu.edu Matt Korth
ky...@enteract.com Kyle Matthews
ldj...@cyberus.ca Daniel Jones
leth...@hotmail.com Alan Walters
lgre...@concentric.net Lewis 'Moose' Gregory
list-...@dream.hb.north.de Martin Schr"oder
Lor...@maitreya.demon.co.uk SGWM (full name can be supplied by e-mail)
Madd...@aol.com Jake Wallace
mam...@garnet.acns.fsu.edu Mike McDonald
mfa...@puc.cl Miguel Farah F.
mid...@iastate.edu David Hibbs
mi...@windshear.xnet.com Michael Mraz
m...@tezcat.com Andrew Holland ...Truck...
ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk Melanie Davies
mor...@dickinson.edu Windsor Morgan
mor...@physics.rice.edu Greg Morrow
most...@entropy.muc.muohio.edu Joseph Robert Baker
mwd...@kodak.com Matthew Daly
ni...@cimio.co.uk Nick Waterman
ni...@inferno.fc.hp.com Nick Ingegneri
nkiv...@chat.carleton.ca Noel Kivimaki
OzDF...@winc.com Ozzy D. Feralson
pa...@lcs.mit.edu Patrick J. LoPresti
pa...@cancom.net Trevor Tymchuk
plac...@usc.edu Placencia, Greg
pri...@best.com Aaron Priven
qu...@cinternet.net Johnny Quest
red...@prado.com Casey Grimm
renk...@gold.tc.umn.edu James Renken
re...@sci.kun.nl Rens Houben
Rich...@mvtel.net Andrew Richardson
ri...@bcm.tmc.edu Richard H. Miller
rob...@tomservo.mindspring.com Robbie Honerkamp
ru...@xochi.tezcat.com Rusty
sab...@dreamscape.com Kimberly Sharon Ford
sch...@physik.tu-berlin.de Georg Schwarz
scla...@InfoAve.Net Shawn Clayton
sema...@fox.nstn.ca Alan Slipp
sev...@skycorp.net Steve Evans
sh...@emanon.net Dan Birchall - a thousand times no!
shah...@pipeline.com Nadine Lev
sihv...@geocities.com SaMmIk
sim...@netcom.com Bob Simpson
sir...@blues.jpj.net Timothy Richard Geier
slpn...@sky.net C. Kelly
sm...@ieng.washington.edu rob smith
spoil...@earthlink.net Samuel W. Ault IV
sros...@cisco.com Stuart M. Roseman
stai...@bga.com Dwight Brown
sta...@stamper.com Chris Stamper
stu...@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz Stuart Yeates
syl...@ix.netcom.com Nicholas Sylvain
terr...@tidalwave.net Terrell Henry
tita...@phish.nether.net D. Radcliffe
tom.ra...@nooft.abb.no Tom Randulff
to...@bigdog.fred.net Thomas Restivo
urb...@tir.com.SPAMMERSsuck Red Robin
v...@cbddo2.cb.lucent.com Vincent Guinto
wais...@bigfoot.com Uri Waisbord
wha...@1starnet.com Russell F. Whaley
whit...@freenet.calgary.ab.ca Alfie Whitehead
zwha...@ucdavis.edu Zachary Hampton
Votes in error
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ro...@shell.binary1.com Jon
! Invalid address
sdo...@gl.umbc.edu Scott C. Donohue, BS, NREMT-P
! No vote statement in message
til...@ksu.edu Grand Admiral Lord Tilden Owsen
! No vote statement in message
DeadLock the Feral (NYAR!)
bill...@primenet.com announced:
: LAST CALL FOR VOTES (of 2)
: unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
: unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
:
:Newsgroups line:
:rec.arts.tv.barney.creative Shared Reality inspired by Barney and Friends.
:rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism Criticism of the TV show Barney and Friends.
For those of you who didn't see this or vote on it the first three
times it came through here: VOTE! We've been working of getting the
bureaucracy and adminstrative out of the way so our convo can move into a
large, more stable, and relatively permanent forum. This vote is the last
hurdle to cross in getting there.
We need 100 more Yes vote than No votes, and a 2/3 majority of overall
votes. As of the last posting of the complete list of voter, many of you
(Jihaddi and our supports) out there have not cast your (Yes) ballots like you
should have.
I don't want to see this thing fail because a bunch of you forgot to
vote. Please vote today. If you need copies of the Call For Votes, please go
to news.groups and look for "2nd CFV: rec.arts.tv.barney.{criticism,creative}"
or mail bill...@clark.net directly to request a copy of it.
DLtF(NYAR!)
bill...@primenet.com
RESULT
unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism fails 148:69
unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.creative fails 142:74
rec.arts.tv.barney.{criticism,creative} results - 218 valid votes
Yes No : 2/3? >100? : Pass? : Group
---- ---- : ---- ----- : ----- : -------------------------------------------
148 69 : Yes No : No : rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
142 74 : No No : No : rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
16 invalid votes
For group passage, YES votes must be at least 2/3 of all valid (YES and NO)
votes. There also must be at least 100 more YES votes than NO votes.
There is a five day discussion period after these results are posted.
Unless serious allegations of voting irregularities are raised, the group may
not be voted on again for six months.
Newsgroups line:
rec.arts.tv.barney.creative Shared Reality inspired by Barney and Friends.
rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism Criticism of the TV show Barney and Friends.
This vote was conducted by a neutral third party. Questions about
the proposed group should be directed to the proponent(s).
Proponent: J.D. Marburger <cybr...@infinet.com>
Proponent: David Hibbs <mid...@iastate.edu>
Proponent: J. FoxGlov <fox...@ksu.edu>
Mentor: none
Votetaker: Jeremy Billones <bill...@primenet.com>
RATIONALE: rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
Several newsgroups in the alt.* hierarchy relating to criticism of
the children's television show "Barney and Friends", including
alt.tv.barney and alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die, have been in existence
for over five years with a typical, combined traffic of 200+ posts per
day, the majority of which are on alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die. It has
been proposed that discussion of the negative points of the show be moved
to an alternate group several times due to conflicts with the shared-
reality conversation in the same NGs. In addition, in January of 1996
several of the "Barney newsgroups" were rmgrouped by a forged rmgroup and
a mistaken backup rmgroup. Attempts to re-newgroup by "trusted" alt.*
newgroupers were not entirely successful, and it was suggested on
alt.config that (due to the inability to re-newgroup and the traffic of
the groups pre-rmgroup) an attempt should be made to move to a new group
in the Big Eight hierarchies.
Hence, the group rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism is being created for
the serious discussion and criticism of "Barney and Friends".
RATIONALE: rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
There has been a five-year tradition on Usenet of stories on the
newsgroup alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die in a "shared-reality" universe,
in which a band of fighters known as the Jihad Against Barney have fought
against the purple dinosaur and its minions. The group has been mentioned
in Time and Playboy in the past, and (until a recent rmgroup and not
entirely successful newgroup recently) was receiving upwards of 200+ posts
a day. Furthermore, there has been a long history of other humorous and
other creative postings regarding Barney, including ASCII art, stories not
necessarily related to a shared-reality setting, discussion of
alterations to games including Barney (such as the BarneyDOOM WAD file,
or the BBS door game BarneySplat), parodies of the theme song, etc. on
ab4d. Alt.barney.dinosaur.die.die.die contains, in addition to the shared-
reality world of the Jihad and the humor posts, a fair amount of RL
discussion on how Barney may be harmful in "real life" settings. There
has been complaint about both being on the newsgroup simultaneously; also,
persons on alt.tv.barney have complained about apparent "shared-reality",
fictional, and/or humor posts ending up on their newsgroup.
Hence, the group rec.arts.tv.barney.creative is being created for
the discussion and posts of creative works relating to, or in parody of,
the television show "Barney and Friends".
CHARTER: rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
An unmoderated newsgroup which would provide a forum for the
discussion and debate of potentially negative aspects of the television
show "Barney and Friends". Example topics of discussion would include:
* The potential for harm to emotional maturity presented in the show
* Potentially objectionable/harmful material in the show
* Debate on the educational merit of "Barney and Friends"
* Concerns from parents, academics, and others about the nature of the
show.
To supply such a forum for discussion free of "role-play" or
flammage, and thus allow one to find posts of interest more easily.
To reduce the volume of posts on extant "Barney groups" in the
alt.* hierarchy on sites still receiving the "Barney groups", and provide
a forum for those whose access was removed in the rmgroup and which has
not been restored by the newgroup by Grobe, et. al.
"Pro-Barney" posts are not discouraged, as long as the person is
posting such for purposes of debate and not for flammage.
END CHARTER.
CHARTER: rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
An unmoderated newsgroup which would provide a forum for the
discussion and posting of creative works relating to, or in parody of,
Barney the Dinosaur. This will specifically include shared-reality
roleplay and fictional stories.
Example topics will include:
* Original stories from the Jihad to Destroy Barney the Purple DInosaur's
shared-reality universe. As well, other stories involving Barney, but
not part of the Jihad Universe are welcome. Other samples of posts
could include: parodies, lengthy group-authored epics, poems, essays,
plays, soap operas, and other styles of writing.
* Administrivia of the shared-reality universe such as discussions on
conventions, creation of fictional weaponry, and other background
information.
* Discussion of parodic or other fictional works involving Barney. This
specifically includes reviews of software, game patches, art work,
and similar creative efforts.
* Humorous articles relating to Barney the Dinosaur
* Any other posts relating to Barney the Dinosaur that are not
specifically covered under rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism (please see the
charter for rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism).
This newsgroup is to be created for the following reasons:
- To separate "shared-reality" and "role-play" posts from serious
discussion in the alt.* hierarchy. This will allow for
readers to locate the topic of their interest much easier.
- To reduce the volume of posts on extant "Barney groups" in the
alt.* hierarchy at sites which still carry them.
- To provide an area for discussion for those individuals without
access to the alt.* newsgroups.
END CHARTER.
rec.arts.tv.barney.{criticism,creative} Final Vote Ack
rec.arts.tv.barney.creative ----+
rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism ---+|
||
aa...@netcom.com Aahz YY
ab...@fox.nstn.ca Patrick Stewart YY
adam....@exu.ericsson.se Adam B. Roach YY
a...@contract.co.uk Alan Fleming NN
afa...@umich.edu Andrew Fabbro NN
afn2...@afn.org Follower of the Clawed Albino YY
airc...@concentric.net Michal Douglas NN
aj...@skycorp.net Ajit Deshpande YY
al...@yfn.ysu.edu Tina M. Wood YY
alex...@iastate.edu Alexia Bellinghausen YY
ar...@iastate.edu Arnold R. Cowan NN
ASCI...@delphi.com Austin Seraphin YY
bab...@writeme.com Peter Buchy NN
bcb...@ix.netcom.com Brian Bull YY
bee...@ksu.edu Brooke Emilie Evans YN
ben...@ACS1.BU.EDU Benjamin Hiltunen YY
bhe...@ksu.edu Barbra Henderson NY
Bi...@wishin.com Michael Y-
bla...@pacificrim.net Blain Nelson NN
bo...@datasync.com Martin H. Booda NN
bre...@cc3.adams.edu Sean M. Breen YY
bsr...@ibm.net Brett Ryan YY
bwc...@acs.ucalgary.ca B. Cooke YY
camp...@titan.sas.muohio.edu Devin Campbell YY
cbs...@phoenix.Princeton.EDU Christopher B. Stone NN
c...@sava.gulfnet.com John McKellar YY
c...@pobox.com Chris Koenigsberg YY
codyd...@juno.com Cody Duncan YY
coms...@craft.camp.clarkson.edu Scott F. Comstock YY
cro...@eno.Princeton.EDU Scott Cromar YY
Cron...@aol.com Doug Scheinberg YY
cvic...@internorth.com Charlene Vickers NN
cyo...@tezcat.com YY
d-ul...@niu.edu Dave Ulrick YY
daena...@inorbit.com Majse Dixon YY
dan...@postoffice.ptd.net Danath YY
dan...@gold-link.com Patrick McCarthy YY
dark...@seanet.com Kirk J Felton YY
David.Wrig...@nortel.co.uk David Wright NN
da...@modcon.demon.co.uk David Thornton YY
d...@panix.com David W. Crawford NN
dead...@one.net JD Marburger YY
dead...@cats.ucsc.edu David Brogden YY
Dea...@deanie.demon.co.uk Dean Smith YY
d...@tink.com Deborah Kapell:> NN
DGe...@netlink.co.nz-NO-SPAM Daz Gedye YY
dha...@hal-pc.org David L. Hanson NN
djenk...@aol.com Darrel Jenkins II YY
dl...@skycorp.net Danny Lis YY
donk...@polarnet.com Don Kiely NN
d...@ihug.co.nz David Farrar YY
dur...@best.com Bryant Durrell NN
e...@twin-cities.com ed "love that barney" bertsch NN
elem...@ix.netcom.com Gazzoli M Paul YY
en...@postoffice.ptd.net Paul DeSanto (UpLink Station Boomer) NN
eric_w...@MENTORG.COM Eric Williams YY
es...@inconnect.com Christopher Estep NN
fai...@guinan.aero.org Daniel P. Faigin NN
fe...@airmail.net YY
ferg...@dial.pipex.com Fergus O Connell NN
flam...@hotmail.com Aris Merquoni YY
flu...@macconnect.com Fluffy YY
fo...@mail.bayside.net Ed Murphy YY
fox...@ksu.ksu.edu-nospam J. YY
fra...@dgne.com Frank Gerratana YY
Gal...@cris.com Stephen D. Scott YY
gcha...@irus.rri.uwo.ca Greg Chapman NN
gda...@world.std.com Jerry Dallal YY
geda...@panix.com Gedaliah Friedenberg NN
GGPE...@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU Genevieve Petty YY
g...@gladstone.uoregon.edu Geoff Vanderbeck YY
gold...@primenet.com Cheryl Payne YY
gr...@ifu.net Eric Greenberg YY
gre...@microsoft.com Greg Franklin NN
han...@hg.uleth.ca Edward Dinacci YY
harding.n...@netaxis.com Leander Harding III YY
har...@et.byu.edu Robert Craig Harman NN
har...@pp.kolumbus.fi harri johansson NN
heil...@math.berkeley.edu Stephan Heilmayr YY
hh...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu Jim Baranovich -N
high...@iastate.edu Christopher Landmark YY
HYAT...@aol.com Amy Hyatt YY
hype...@concentric.net Michael Davis YY
il...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu Ray Pastore NN
i...@alumni.cs.colorado.edu Bob Ito NN
ja...@hermes.cam.ac.uk June Linden YY
ja...@cwo.com Keith Adams YY
ja...@r33h142.res.gatech.edu Jason Bennett NN
jay...@concentric.net Jay Lapidus YY
jclai...@earthlink.net Justin Clairmont YY
jda...@nyx.net John P. Darrow YY
jdf...@cybernothing.org YY
je...@server1.milagro.com.blacksburg.va.us Jesus Eugenio Sanchez NN
j...@kamens.brookline.ma.us Jonathan Kamens NN
jim...@pipeline.com Jim Riley NN
JJR...@ACS.TAMU.EDU YY
jlow...@pwa.acusd.edu John Lowther NN
Joel.Br...@mrash.fr Joel Brogniart NN
j...@drum.msfc.nasa.gov J. Porter Clark NN
jpim...@nectech.com John Pimentel NN
j...@gladstone.uoregon.edu Jim Yearnshaw YY
j...@idiom.com Michael Craft YY
jsk...@merle.acns.nwu.edu Joshua Kreitzer NN
jter...@nbnet.nb.ca James Terhune YY
jul...@fwb.gulf.net Jules Dubois YY
jwa...@acpub.duke.edu James C. Wagner Jr. YY
kah...@panix.com Andy Finkenstadt NN
Kaos...@concentric.net Karl Browning YY
kas...@kasper.seanet.com RedEye YY
ka...@rigel.econ.uga.edu Kate Wrightson NN
ka...@cicero.spc.uchicago.edu Katharine Weizel YY
kat...@uclink4.berkeley.edu Katrina "Kat" Templeton YY
kaz...@detroit.infi.net steve mcwilliams YY
kee...@wco.com Brian Matthews YY
k...@bellsouth.net Keith Hudson YY
kh...@cs.nyu.edu Hasnain Khan YY
ki...@vcn.bc.ca Greg Webster YN
ki...@netcom.com Kim DeVaughn YY
kort...@cps.msu.edu Matt Korth YY
ku...@ms.uky.edu John Allen Kuchenbrod YY
ky...@enteract.com Kyle Matthews YY
l...@zk3.dec.com Larry Smith YN
ldj...@cyberus.ca Daniel Jones YY
LE32...@miamiu.acs.muohio.edu Lisa Ehrichs YY
le...@xmission.com Lee Choquette YY
leth...@hotmail.com Alan Walters YY
lgre...@concentric.net Lewis 'Moose' Gregory YY
list-...@dream.hb.north.de Martin Schr"oder NN
Lor...@maitreya.demon.co.uk SGWM (full name can be supplied by e-mail) YN
ls...@notes.primeco.com Laurie Sain YY
Madd...@aol.com Jake Wallace YY
mag...@ii.uib.no Magnus Y Alvestad NN
mar...@pacbell.net Aaron Marquez NN
matu...@marlin.navsea.navy.mil Alex Matulich YY
mcdo...@smtp.gc.ca Gary K. McDonald NN
mfa...@puc.cl Miguel Farah F. YY
mid...@iastate.edu David Hibbs YY
mi...@windshear.xnet.com Michael Mraz YY
m...@tezcat.com Andrew Holland ...Truck... YY
mor...@dickinson.edu Windsor Morgan NN
mor...@physics.rice.edu Greg Morrow NN
most...@entropy.muc.muohio.edu Joseph Robert Baker YY
mtp...@isca.uiowa.edu Michael T Pins NN
mwd...@kodak.com Matthew Daly NN
ni...@cimio.co.uk Nick Waterman NN
ni...@inferno.fc.hp.com Nick Ingegneri YY
n...@skycorp.net N.I. Nails YY
nkiv...@chat.carleton.ca Noel Kivimaki NN
n_c...@hotmail.com Norbert Sayle YY
OzDF...@winc.com Ozzy D. Feralson YY
pa...@lcs.mit.edu Patrick J. LoPresti NN
pa...@moore.com Paul Maclauchlan NN
paulmd@efn...org Paul Dietrich Y-
pa...@cancom.net Trevor Tymchuk NN
peanu...@hotmail.com B. Reiheld YY
plac...@usc.edu Placencia, Greg YY
pr...@gladstone.uoregon.edu Ian Fuller YY
pri...@best.com Aaron Priven YY
qu...@cinternet.net Johnny Quest YY
rboe...@austx.tandem.com Ron Boerger NN
red...@prado.com Casey Grimm YY
r...@one-o.com Robert E. Maas YY
renk...@gold.tc.umn.edu James Renken YY
re...@sci.kun.nl Rens Houben YY
Rich...@mvtel.net Andrew Richardson YY
ri...@bcm.tmc.edu Richard H. Miller YY
rob...@tomservo.mindspring.com Robbie Honerkamp NN
Robert_A...@BAYLOR.EDU Robert Armstrong YY
robo...@eyrie.org Christopher E. Meadows YY
rsto...@ford.com R. Gregory Stockton NN
ru...@xochi.tezcat.com Rusty YY
S.NE...@IX.NETCOM.COM Stella Nemeth NN
sab...@dreamscape.com Kimberly Sharon Ford YY
sch...@physik.tu-berlin.de Georg Schwarz NN
scla...@InfoAve.Net Shawn Clayton YY
sdo...@gl.umbc.edu Scott C. Donohue NN
sema...@fox.nstn.ca Alan Slipp YY
sev...@skycorp.net Steve Evans YY
sh...@emanon.net Dan Birchall - a thousand times no! NN
shah...@pipeline.com Nadine Lev YY
sihv...@geocities.com SaMmIk NN
si...@darkmere.gen.nz Simon Lyall YY
sim...@netcom.com Bob Simpson YY
slpn...@sky.net C. Kelly YY
SL...@cc.usu.edu John Nolan YY
sm...@ieng.washington.edu rob smith NN
spar...@cnet-nuisance.com Josh Mculloch YY
spoil...@earthlink.net Samuel W. Ault IV NN
sros...@cisco.com Stuart M. Roseman YY
stai...@bga.com Dwight Brown NN
sta...@stamper.com Chris Stamper YY
st...@dickinson.ctctel.com Stewart Wheeler YY
stho...@peak.org Allen R. Scott-Thoennes NN
stu...@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz Stuart Yeates YY
susan...@hotmail.com Susan Lloyd YY
syl...@ix.netcom.com Nicholas Sylvain NN
tan...@wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us Tim Yearnshaw YY
t...@Mcs.Net Thomas Cuny NN
terr...@tidalwave.net Terrell Henry YY
til...@ksu.edu Jeffery Allan Bohning YY
tita...@phish.nether.net D. Radcliffe YY
tjas...@us.oracle.com Tom Jaskiewicz NN
t...@xara.net Timothy Hunt YY
tla...@asu.edu Todd C. Lawson YN
tom.ra...@nooft.abb.no Tom Randulff NN
to...@bigdog.fred.net Thomas Restivo YY
to...@dial.isys.hu Toth Andras YY
trav...@skycorp.net Traveler YY
umfr...@cc.umanitoba.ca Dawn M. Friesen YY
urb...@tir.com.SPAMMERSsuck Red Robin YY
van...@alaska.net Amanda Van Rhyn YY
vi...@geom.helsinki.fi Ville Hakulinen YY
v...@cbddo2.cb.lucent.com Vincent Guinto YY
wais...@bigfoot.com Uri Waisbord NN
wha...@1starnet.com Russell F. Whaley YY
whit...@freenet.calgary.ab.ca Alfie Whitehead YY
xhi...@hotmail.com X.E. Le Zarde YY
zwha...@ucdavis.edu Zachary Hampton YY
Votes in error
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9TRIN...@spcvxa.spc.edu
! No ballot
aha...@mail.airmail.net
!Invalid CFV
aste...@pacific.telebyte.com Amber Stevens (aste...@pacific.telebyte.com
!Invalid CFV
ble...@accent.net
!Invalid CFV
DW...@bofh.mi.org Daniel George Wood
! Invalid CFV
Frances...@williams.edu F. Gomes (Lt. Comm. Jaina, TRES Corps)
!Invalid CFV
JADC...@ARTSU1.watstar.uwaterloo.ca Doug Corti
!Invalid CFV
jbu...@ksu.edu Jennifer A. Burdoo
!Invalid CFV
ke...@sun1.uconect.net Keili
!Invalid CFV
mam...@garnet.acns.fsu.edu Mike McDonald
!Invalid CFV
ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk Melanie Davies
!Invalid CFV
ro...@shell.binary1.com Jon
! Invalid address
sir...@blues.jpj.net Timothy Richard Geier
! Invalid CFV
vinc...@ix.netcom.com
!Invalid CFV
will....@mail.utexas.edu Will Keith
!Invalid CFV
x5...@concentric.net Mike Carter
!Invalid CFV
Kate the Short
In article <32fea0b0...@news.earthlink.net>,
nfo <jclai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Feb 1997 02:10:00 GMT, bill...@primenet.com wrote:
>
>> RESULT
>> unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism fails 148:69
>> unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.creative fails 142:74
>
>way. Why couldn't we debate on the idea of the newsgroups first? I
>would be interested in knowing why people would vote against the idea.
Um, the newsgroups *were* debated for a couple of weeks, heck, a few
months. Since last October or November at any rate. However, most of
the discussion was kept to news.groups. That's what usually happens
with these discussions as that's the place that really needs to see it
for rec.* group creation. [note that this is crossposted but that the
followups are set only to news.groups.]
kate.
| Kate the Short -(ka...@cicero.spc.uchicago.edu)- at the U of Chicago |
| Visit my web page! (http://student-www.uchicago.edu/users/keweizel/) |
| Keeper of: RAC.MX Read Before Posting and Where Can I Find It? FAQs |
| Patron Saint of rec.arts.comics.marvel.xbooks, & Really Short Person |
Melanie Davies
bill...@primenet.com wrote:
>
> RESULT
> unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism fails 148:69
> unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.creative fails 142:74
>
> rec.arts.tv.barney.{criticism,creative} results - 218 valid votes
>
> Yes No : 2/3? >100? : Pass? : Group
> ---- ---- : ---- ----- : ----- : -------------------------------------------
> 148 69 : Yes No : No : rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
> 142 74 : No No : No : rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
> 16 invalid votes
>
> For group passage, YES votes must be at least 2/3 of all valid (YES and NO)
> votes. There also must be at least 100 more YES votes than NO votes.
>
> There is a five day discussion period after these results are posted.
> Unless serious allegations of voting irregularities are raised, the group may
> not be voted on again for six months.
>
I've got a few comments to make. Firstly I've been on a.b.4d for about an year now
and I was really hoping these new groups would be created, and I'm just a bit
disapointed with this result :o(. There are a few things I think are a bit dodgy
that I'll comment on further down. I don't know much this stuff so I don't know if
there are serious irregularities but I think it's worth mentining them anyway.
> Newsgroups line:
> rec.arts.tv.barney.creative Shared Reality inspired by Barney and Friends.
> rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism Criticism of the TV show Barney and Friends.
>
> This vote was conducted by a neutral third party. Questions about
> the proposed group should be directed to the proponent(s).
>
> Proponent: J.D. Marburger <cybr...@infinet.com>
> Proponent: David Hibbs <mid...@iastate.edu>
> Proponent: J. FoxGlov <fox...@ksu.edu>
> Mentor: none
> Votetaker: Jeremy Billones <bill...@primenet.com>
>
(snip of rationales and charters)
>
> rec.arts.tv.barney.{criticism,creative} Final Vote Ack
>
There are a few no votes here that I think are a bit suspect:
> rec.arts.tv.barney.creative ----+
> rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism ---+|
> ||
(most of the votes snipped)
> d...@tink.com Deborah Kapell:> NN
Not a user at this domain.
> Joel.Br...@mrash.fr Joel Brogniart NN
User and domain invalid
> list-...@dream.hb.north.de Martin Schr"oder NN
Probable list-serv address, private machine on an ISP LAN run by a tech or admin.
If this is the address of a list-serv then that "list-votes" bit looks very
suspicious to me, is it possible someone has been campaining for no votes? Posting
from a list-serve address looks pretty suspicious anyway (person could have voted
with an ordinary email address as well).
Isn't it possible for an admin (which it's possible this is I think) to create
accounts? Has anybody noticed other dodgy looking votes from this domain that I
didn't spot??
> mag...@ii.uib.no Magnus Y Alvestad NN
User mask. Fingering this address returns eight users.
> mor...@physics.rice.edu Greg Morrow NN
According to the university info this person doesn't have an email account.
> sch...@physik.tu-berlin.de Georg Schwarz NN
This one doesn't seem to exist either (can't be found in university database).
>
> Votes in error
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 9TRIN...@spcvxa.spc.edu
> ! No ballot
> aha...@mail.airmail.net
> !Invalid CFV
> aste...@pacific.telebyte.com Amber Stevens (aste...@pacific.telebyte.com
> !Invalid CFV
> ble...@accent.net
> !Invalid CFV
> DW...@bofh.mi.org Daniel George Wood
> ! Invalid CFV
> Frances...@williams.edu F. Gomes (Lt. Comm. Jaina, TRES Corps)
> !Invalid CFV
> JADC...@ARTSU1.watstar.uwaterloo.ca Doug Corti
> !Invalid CFV
> jbu...@ksu.edu Jennifer A. Burdoo
> !Invalid CFV
> ke...@sun1.uconect.net Keili
> !Invalid CFV
> mam...@garnet.acns.fsu.edu Mike McDonald
> !Invalid CFV
> ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk Melanie Davies
> !Invalid CFV
That's me. I didn't realise I'd done anything wrong when I voted but if I did do
something that messed up my vote then fine, that's the rules but I think it's a bit
strange that my vote seemed to have been validated just fine when the list of people
who'd voted successfully was posted in the second CFV.
I voted before the second CFV and haven't revoted since. I got a mail back saying
my vote had been counted and my vote was on the list of OK ones. If I did mess up
then it's my own fault, my objection is that my vote was listed as successful in the
2nd CFV, if it was listed as invalid then I could have revoted but since it wasn't I
couldn't do anything about it which I think is highly unfair. I didn't vote really
close before the second CFV was posted, I think there was plenty of time for my vote
to be declared invalid before the 2nd CFV was posted.
I just checked back with the 2nd CFV and I'm not the only one on this list that was
listed as having made a valid vote in the 2nd CFV that has been listed as invalid
CFV, if they all messed up too then ok, but why wasn't this posted in the 2nd
CFV??!??!!
The ones who's votes were valid in the 2nd CFV are:
aste...@pacific.telebyte.com
DW...@bofh.mi.org
frances...@williams.edu
JADC...@ARTSU1.watstar.uwaterloo.ca
Jbu...@ksu.edu
Ke...@sun1.uconect.net
mam...@garnet.acns.fsu.edu
ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk
sir...@blues.jpj.net
Out of 16 votes in error, 8 of them were listed as valid at the time the 2nd CFV was
posted, and a lot of them, all but one actually, I recognise as regulars on a.b.4d
who I think it's pretty likely would have voted yes.
> ro...@shell.binary1.com Jon
> ! Invalid address
> sir...@blues.jpj.net Timothy Richard Geier
> ! Invalid CFV
> vinc...@ix.netcom.com
> !Invalid CFV
> will....@mail.utexas.edu Will Keith
> !Invalid CFV
> x5...@concentric.net Mike Carter
> !Invalid CFV
Melanie
Kate the Short
Melanie Davies <ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>bill...@primenet.com wrote:
>>
>> RESULT
>> unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism fails 148:69
>> unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.creative fails 142:74
>>
>> rec.arts.tv.barney.{criticism,creative} results - 218 valid votes
>>
>> Yes No : 2/3? >100? : Pass? : Group
>> ---- ---- : ---- ----- : ----- : -------------------------------------------
>> 148 69 : Yes No : No : rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
>> 142 74 : No No : No : rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
>> 16 invalid votes
>>
>> For group passage, YES votes must be at least 2/3 of all valid (YES and NO)
>> votes. There also must be at least 100 more YES votes than NO votes.
>>
>> There is a five day discussion period after these results are posted.
>> Unless serious allegations of voting irregularities are raised, the group may
>> not be voted on again for six months.
>
>
>> rec.arts.tv.barney.creative ----+
>> rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism ---+|
>
>
>
>According to the university info this person doesn't have an email account.
"Elmo" aka Greg Morrow most certainly DOES have an email account. Check
out any of the rec.arts.comics.* newsgroups for more info.
Just because you can't find the person in a database doesnt' mean they
don't exist. If you fingered my account at @uchicago.edu you'd get a
very different result than if you fingered it at @cicero.uchicago.edu or
@midway.uchicago.edu (which itself requires you to finger one of four
machines, mine is @ellis.uchicago.edu).
kate.
Kate the Short -(ka...@cicero.spc.uchicago.edu)- at the U. of Chicago
http://student-www.uchicago.edu/users/keweizel/ Patron Saint of RACMX
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOOK! HARK! The second RFD finally got posted. Whee!
I'm the proponent of rec.arts.comics.reviews; See news:news.groups for info
ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/rec/rec.arts.comics.reviews
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read FAQs at: http://student-www.uchicago.edu/users/keweizel/faq.html
DeadLock the Feral (NYAR!)
On Mon, 10 Feb 1997 02:10:00 GMT, bill...@primenet.com pontificated:
: RESULT
: unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism fails 148:69
: unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.creative fails 142:74
[...]
:There is a five day discussion period after these results are posted.
:Unless serious allegations of voting irregularities are raised, the group may
:not be voted on again for six months.
[...]
:Votetaker: Jeremy Billones <bill...@primenet.com>
[...]
Myself and several others have reviewed the results and found several
discrepancies and a couple of highly questionable things. They are outlined
below.
:rec.arts.tv.barney.{criticism,creative} Final Vote Ack
[...reordering final ack...]
: rec.arts.tv.barney.creative ----+
: rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism ---+|
: ||
:list-...@dream.hb.north.de Martin Schr"oder NN
^^^^^^^^^^
This is some sort of mail distribution alias, probably a listserv, on
hb.north.de's TCP/IP LAN. Finger, smtp, et. al. all fail on every machine but
dream, which does not identify list-votes as a user, but accepts mail.
Given that the person idetified as voting No works for this ISP is
some technical/administrative capacity and the name list-votes, it very likely
is a listserv. This, and a couple of things below, are evidence someone
campaigned against the CFV.
[..European No Votes from France, Germany, Norway, Finland, etc..]
Looking over the results, I see a relatively substantial number of
double No votes coming from European countries. This is the first time I've
gone over CFV results in detail, even read the full list of who voted, but it
seems rather questionable, given the list-votes, that all those people would
have voted No.
Picking through other No votes:
:sihv...@geocities.com SaMmIk NN
Points back to sihv...@kol2.kotka.fi
This is an additional European No vote, lending additional weight to
what's above.
:a...@contract.co.uk Alan Fleming NN
No one, including those in the UK checking results, have been able to
connect to contract.co.uk or locate it for verification.
:Joel.Br...@mrash.fr Joel Brogniart NN
Apparently an invalid userid and domain.
:sch...@physik.tu-berlin.de Georg Schwarz NN
Cannot confirm this person actually exists in his institution.
There's a Schwartz on the physics staff, but no Schwarz.
[...list of voters...]
:d...@tink.com Deborah Kapell:> NN
This person is not a user at tink.com. Possible forgery.
[...end of voters...]
:aha...@mail.airmail.net
:aste...@pacific.telebyte.com Amber Stevens (aste...@pacific.telebyte.com
:ble...@accent.net
:DW...@bofh.mi.org Daniel George Wood
:Frances...@williams.edu F. Gomes (Lt. Comm. Jaina, TRES Corps)
:JADC...@ARTSU1.watstar.uwaterloo.ca Doug Corti
:jbu...@ksu.edu Jennifer A. Burdoo
:ke...@sun1.uconect.net Keili
:mam...@garnet.acns.fsu.edu Mike McDonald
:ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk Melanie Davies
:sir...@blues.jpj.net Timothy Richard Geier
:vinc...@ix.netcom.com
:will....@mail.utexas.edu Will Keith
:x5...@concentric.net Mike Carter
These are all members of the Jihad, in most cases people who have been
frequent posters to ab4d for 6 month or more, and Yes votes. As you had asked
about in mail, I sent a raw copy of the CFV to a Jihad member-only listserv so
that people who no longer had ab4d on their servers, or a severely lagged
server, could vote on it. For example, more than a few members of the Jihad
have news server which either get articles 7 to 14 days after the original
posting date or have an extremely limited space, such as a couple of gigs(1),
which keeps posts from hanging around for any time.
It's really a mystery to me why these votes were just declared invalid
without any checking on the details whatsoever, which had already been
discussed in private mail. The language of the CFV doesn't explicitly
prohibit forwarding of the CFV to inherently interested parties (those reading
and posting to the NG), but their votes were declared invalid without any
checking when I'd explained what had happened.
Finally, I read through the list of votes and noticed that at least 15
people who informed me they voted were not counted at all in any of the CFV
postings. Several individuals from the muohio.edu, xu.edu, uc.edu, aol.com,
netcom.com, and other domains were not counted in this process despite
repeated attempts at voting from their account. As well, a couple of people
reported bounces from vot...@clark.net when attempting to send in their
ballots.
Given all of the above, I think a re-vote is merited.
JDM
(1)If you laugh at the idea of a news server with a couple of gigs: I went to
a University with 25000+ users and a news server w/ 3.5 gigs of *total* space.
Since they admins couldn't get money for additional storage, they configged
the server to shovel delete articles when the disk was full, regardless of
date. Given news runs between 4 and 6 GB a day, you'd have to read news at
least twice a day to stand a chance of catching everything. Many members of
the Jihad are in a situation similar to this, hence finding the CFV on ab4d
wasn't entirely possible.
Jeremy Billones
In article <3301a651...@news.one.net>,
DeadLock the Feral (NYAR!) <dead...@one.net.no.spam> wrote:
>[..European No Votes from France, Germany, Norway, Finland, etc..]
>
> Looking over the results, I see a relatively substantial number of
>double No votes coming from European countries. This is the first time I've
>gone over CFV results in detail, even read the full list of who voted, but it
>seems rather questionable, given the list-votes, that all those people would
>have voted No.
So you're saying that a given country in Europe should only be allowed to
cast 1 vote? I don't understand.
> It's really a mystery to me why these votes were just declared invalid
>without any checking on the details whatsoever, which had already been
>discussed in private mail. The language of the CFV doesn't explicitly
>prohibit forwarding of the CFV to inherently interested parties (those reading
>and posting to the NG), but their votes were declared invalid without any
>checking when I'd explained what had happened.
Shortly before the deadline, I received a vote that contained copied text
in your writing style to the effect "remember to delete any reference that
you got this request to vote YES by email, because the votetaker is looking
for it." At that point I went back and started invalidating any votes
that were clearly based on an emailed CFV. As I noted in my original
follow-up to the results post, I used a conservative method to invalidate
the votes. A more liberal method would have invalidated many more.
In retrospect, I could have invalidated all such votes immediately and
avoided controversy. I was *trying* to give you the benefit of the doubt.
> Finally, I read through the list of votes and noticed that at least 15
>people who informed me they voted were not counted at all in any of the CFV
>postings. Several individuals from the muohio.edu, xu.edu, uc.edu, aol.com,
>netcom.com, and other domains were not counted in this process despite
>repeated attempts at voting from their account. As well, a couple of people
>reported bounces from vot...@clark.net when attempting to send in their
>ballots.
("In my hands, I hold a list...")
As stated in the CFV, any problems mailing to voting@clark net should have
been reported to my personal account at bill...@primenet.com
I did not receive ONE complaint of a bounced vote. Not one.
Jeremy Billones
Vic Kevlar
Kate the Short wrote:
>
> Melanie Davies <ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> >bill...@primenet.com wrote:
> >>
> >> RESULT
> >> unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism fails 148:69
> >> unmoderated group rec.arts.tv.barney.creative fails 142:74
> >>
> >> rec.arts.tv.barney.{criticism,creative} results - 218 valid votes
> >>
> >> Yes No : 2/3? >100? : Pass? : Group
> >> ---- ---- : ---- ----- : ----- : -------------------------------------------
> >> 148 69 : Yes No : No : rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism
> >> 142 74 : No No : No : rec.arts.tv.barney.creative
> >> 16 invalid votes
> >>
> >> For group passage, YES votes must be at least 2/3 of all valid (YES and NO)
> >> votes. There also must be at least 100 more YES votes than NO votes.
> >>
> >> There is a five day discussion period after these results are posted.
> >> Unless serious allegations of voting irregularities are raised, the group may
> >> not be voted on again for six months.
> >
> >
> >> rec.arts.tv.barney.creative ----+
> >> rec.arts.tv.barney.criticism ---+|
> >
> >
> >
> >According to the university info this person doesn't have an email account.
>
> out any of the rec.arts.comics.* newsgroups for more info.
Alright. If this person exists, as you have validated, then fine.
That's one
off the list. How about the rest of the *highly* questionable "no"
votes,
such as the one whose username is "list-votes," the one that is a user
mask
for eight different addresses, and etc.? (They were all mentioned in
the
original post that you replied to, so I'll spare you the bandwidth.)
I'm not accusing anyone, only wondering why it was so easy to find
problems with
"yes" votes that in most people's opinions weren't even real problems,
and
nothing seems to have been done to even the most glaring discrepancies
and
breeches of the rules with "no" votes. If one side is going to be held
to the
rules so strictly, the other should as well. Since we find many of the
"no"
votes questionable, we are pursuing the matter in order to get to the
bottom
of it. If there is nothing wrong with them, then so be it, but if we
are
correct, (as it seems so far, save for the address listed above, and
we're
simply going on your word, since no other confirmation is available)
A polite explanation would be appreciated, if one is available..
>
> Just because you can't find the person in a database doesnt' mean they
> don't exist. If you fingered my account at @uchicago.edu you'd get a
> very different result than if you fingered it at @cicero.uchicago.edu or
> @midway.uchicago.edu (which itself requires you to finger one of four
> machines, mine is @ellis.uchicago.edu).
This is true, but it certainly raises suspicions, and very rightly so.
We can account for nearly all the "yes" votes and who they are, but
all the "no" votes are completely unknown, and many of them do not seem
to be single users, or even valid addresses, yet I can only assume that
they were not checked up on as the "yes" votes were. That is why
we are doing it now, instead.
I don't claim to know everything about the creation of NG's, nor about
the internet in general, but something doesn't seem right. The pointing
of fingers would be a complete waste of time, but it seems that with the
nonexistant and questionable addresses removed from the "no" column and
the "yes" votes that should not have been removed restored (some of them
have said that they did not understand the directions, and admit to
accidentally screwing up their ballots, and some have no idea why they
weren't counted.) both groups would have passed by a relatively
comfortable
margin. If they fail they fail, we may as well make absolutely sure,
in light of all the discrepancies on both sides.
>
> kate.
I apologize for the length of this post, but it seems to me that your
post deserved a proper explanation.
>
> Kate the Short -(ka...@cicero.spc.uchicago.edu)- at the U. of Chicago
> http://student-www.uchicago.edu/users/keweizel/ Patron Saint of RACMX
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> LOOK! HARK! The second RFD finally got posted. Whee!
> I'm the proponent of rec.arts.comics.reviews; See news:news.groups for info
> ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/rec/rec.arts.comics.reviews
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Read FAQs at: http://student-www.uchicago.edu/users/keweizel/faq.html
--
::Ozzy The Feral (NYAR!), Maenad of the Holy Albino::----========
======----::Legion Commander IronMan, Dir. Intel & Sp Ops., LoD::
*** Legion of Doom Page: http://www.concentric.net/~x5150/lod/ **
------------------Email: x5...@concentric.net--------------------
Jani Patokallio
DeadLock the Feral (NYAR!) (dead...@one.net.no.spam) wrote:
: Myself and several others have reviewed the results and found several
: discrepancies and a couple of highly questionable things. They are outlined
: below.
And you're about to hear that myself and several others have reviewed the
review of the results and found several discrepancies and a couple of
highly questionable things. Now, I'm not Jeremy Billones, but:
: :list-...@dream.hb.north.de Martin Schr"oder NN
: ^^^^^^^^^^
:
: This is some sort of mail distribution alias, probably a listserv, on
: hb.north.de's TCP/IP LAN. Finger, smtp, et. al. all fail on every machine but
: dream, which does not identify list-votes as a user, but accepts mail.
: Given that the person idetified as voting No works for this ISP is
: some technical/administrative capacity and the name list-votes, it very likely
: is a listserv. This, and a couple of things below, are evidence someone
: campaigned against the CFV.
Huh? Mr. Schröder is a regular voter who votes on many proposals (and both
YES and NO, for that matter). All of Mr. Schröder's votes come from
the 'list-votes' address and he has every right to create an alias for
easier filing of mail. This is exceedingly flimsy evidence for a
conspiracy.
: [..European No Votes from France, Germany, Norway, Finland, etc..]
:
: Looking over the results, I see a relatively substantial number of
: double No votes coming from European countries. This is the first time I've
: gone over CFV results in detail, even read the full list of who voted, but it
: seems rather questionable, given the list-votes, that all those people would
: have voted No.
I suspect many Europeans felt, like myself, that creating -two- worldwide
newsgroups for a TV program aired almost exclusively in the US would be
silly, especially when this program happens to be a particularly inane
kids' show. I, personally, didn't care enough to vote against it, but
I can imagine that some would.
: :a...@contract.co.uk Alan Fleming NN
:
: No one, including those in the UK checking results, have been able to
: connect to contract.co.uk or locate it for verification.
As has already been pointed out, there are many, many machines on the
'Net that are not directly accessible; just try verifying the existence
of my home computer brahman.nullnet.fi, which is connected only by a chain
of UUCP links. Are you going to assert that I don't exist, just because
whois doesn't know what or where brahman.nullnet.fi is?
: Given all of the above, I think a re-vote is merited.
Even if everything you allege were to be true, you'd still have a hard
time coming up with the 21 extra YES votes needed for passage and you
have provided no hard evidence whatsoever for your assertions. Do you
have any acks for uncounted votes? Do you have messages exhorting people
to vote against the groups with tampered ballots included? Do you have
a copy of a page from the votetaker's personal diary where he confesses to
being a devotee of the foul B'harne?
Cheers,
--
Jani Patokallio | Elämä ei ole henkeä eikä ainetta, vaan liikettä.
jpat...@alpha.hut.fi | Entropy: http://www.tky.hut.fi/~entropy/
Vic Kevlar
Jeremy Billones wrote:
>
> In article <3301a651...@news.one.net>,
> DeadLock the Feral (NYAR!) <dead...@one.net.no.spam> wrote:
> >
> > Looking over the results, I see a relatively substantial number of
> >double No votes coming from European countries. This is the first time I've
> >gone over CFV results in detail, even read the full list of who voted, but it
> >seems rather questionable, given the list-votes, that all those people would
> >have voted No.
>
> cast 1 vote? I don't understand.
Not to speak for him, but this is the way I see it... There are almost
*NO*
posters from any european country other than the UK (of which there are
several,
with the majority being people who voted (or at least tried...) yes) on
a.b.d4, which is where most of the yes votes came from, and even a chunk
of the
no votes. This seems rather suspicious, considering that some of the
"no" votes
appear to be from the same person, after an investigation. Not only
that, but
some addresses don't even appear to be people at all. (The most obvious
example
being the "person" with the username "list-votes".)
Since we have an obvious bias, you should understand why little
inconsistencies
such as this one appear very suspicious, and we are therefore checking
up on
some of them. If we're wrong, we're wrong, but nobody will know until
either
we look into it, or you look into it.
>
> > It's really a mystery to me why these votes were just declared invalid
> >without any checking on the details whatsoever, which had already been
> >discussed in private mail. The language of the CFV doesn't explicitly
> >prohibit forwarding of the CFV to inherently interested parties (those reading
> >and posting to the NG), but their votes were declared invalid without any
> >checking when I'd explained what had happened.
>
> Shortly before the deadline, I received a vote that contained copied text
> in your writing style to the effect "remember to delete any reference that
> you got this request to vote YES by email, because the votetaker is looking
> for it." At that point I went back and started invalidating any votes
> that were clearly based on an emailed CFV. As I noted in my original
> follow-up to the results post, I used a conservative method to invalidate
> the votes. A more liberal method would have invalidated many more.
I think it is worthwhile to point out that the language of the initial
CFV
was pretty vague on certain matters, such as forwarding copies of it,
etc.
Therefore, it should not be surprising that something like that would
happen,
because there is no legal, binding phrase that says such actions are
unallowable. Words like "please don't mail this," "I don't suggest you
forward this," and "you shouldn't pass this out" will mean different
things
to different people. I am not accusing anyone of any wrongdoing, since
I
might have done the same thing if I were writing it up, but the
discrepancy
is there, and it should be noted, at least.
>
> In retrospect, I could have invalidated all such votes immediately and
> avoided controversy. I was *trying* to give you the benefit of the doubt.
I thank you for that, then.
>
> > Finally, I read through the list of votes and noticed that at least 15
> >people who informed me they voted were not counted at all in any of the CFV
> >postings. Several individuals from the muohio.edu, xu.edu, uc.edu, aol.com,
> >netcom.com, and other domains were not counted in this process despite
> >repeated attempts at voting from their account. As well, a couple of people
> >reported bounces from vot...@clark.net when attempting to send in their
> >ballots.
>
> ("In my hands, I hold a list...")
>
> As stated in the CFV, any problems mailing to voting@clark net should have
> been reported to my personal account at bill...@primenet.com
>
> I did not receive ONE complaint of a bounced vote. Not one.
The first three times I tried to mail my ballot, it bounced, but I tried
one
last time and it worked, so I didn't send any mail. I can only assume
that
this is the case with others, except maybe they weren't as patient as
me.
>
> Jeremy Billones
Robert Craig Harman
Vic Kevlar wrote:
>
> This is true, but it certainly raises suspicions, and very rightly so.
> We can account for nearly all the "yes" votes and who they are, but
> all the "no" votes are completely unknown, and many of them do not
> seem to be single users, or even valid addresses, yet I can only
> assume that they were not checked up on as the "yes" votes were.
> That is why we are doing it now, instead.
The underscored statement is patently incorrect.
You can start with mine as being one of the confirmed _no_ votes.
And mine is certainly not the only one.
--
Robert Craig Harman En France, appelez 01 39 76 68 84 pour
BYU Chemical Engineering recevoir un Livre de Mormon gratuit...
Master's Candidate
LDS France Paris Mission http://www.et.byu.edu/~harmanr/mission.html
Russ Allbery
In news.groups, Melanie Davies <ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk> writes:
>> d...@tink.com Deborah Kapell NN
> Not a user at this domain.
You appear to be correct there.
>> Joel.Br...@mrash.fr Joel Brogniart NN
> User and domain invalid
The domain certainly is not invalid.
domain: mrash.fr
descr: Maison Rhones Alpes des Sciences de l'Homme
descr: 14, avenue Berthelot, 69363 Lyon CEDEX 07, France
admin-c: Michele Auclair
tech-c: Daniel Roux
tech-c: Philippe Bawarshi
zone-c: AR41
nserver: docsrvr.mrash.fr
nserver: diogene.univ-lyon2.fr
dom-net: 193.48.145.0
mnt-by: FR-NIC-MNT
changed: Benoit...@inria.fr 950307
source: RIPE
The user is valid:
cyclone:~> expn Joel.Br...@docsrvr.mrash.fr
[docsrvr.mrash.fr]
<jbr...@DOCSRVR.mrash.fr>
>> list-...@dream.hb.north.de Martin Schr"oder NN
> Probable list-serv address, private machine on an ISP LAN run by a tech
> or admin.
No, probably someone who uses a different voting address so that they can
save all of their newsgroup creation votes. I've considered doing that a
few times myself.
>> mag...@ii.uib.no Magnus Y Alvestad NN
> User mask. Fingering this address returns eight users.
And one of them voted. There's nothing wrong with that.
>> mor...@physics.rice.edu Greg Morrow NN
> According to the university info this person doesn't have an email
> account.
*snrk* This is why I responded. Greg Morrow, aka Elmo, is the person who
coordinates several hierarchy-wide FAQs for rec.arts.comics.*. He very
much has an e-mail account.
>> sch...@physik.tu-berlin.de Georg Schwarz NN
> This one doesn't seem to exist either (can't be found in university
> database).
cyclone:~> expn sch...@emmi.physik.tu-berlin.de
[emmi.physik.tu-berlin.de]
Guenther Schwarz <sch...@theo23.RZ-Berlin.MPG.DE>
Guenther Schwarz <\sch...@emmi.physik.TU-Berlin.DE>
Looks like he exists to me.
>> ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk Melanie Davies
>> !Invalid CFV
> That's me. I didn't realise I'd done anything wrong when I voted but if
> I did do something that messed up my vote then fine, that's the rules
> but I think it's a bit strange that my vote seemed to have been
> validated just fine when the list of people who'd voted successfully was
> posted in the second CFV.
The vote-taker commented that there was e-mail solicitation of votes, and
that he rejected all votes which were clearly sent in response to that
solicitation rather than the CFV posted to news.announce.newgroups. It's
unfortunate that you got caught by that, since you certainly seem to be
actually following the debate, but even if all of those votes were
reinstated the group wouldn't pass. I'd recommend taking it as a lesson
to always vote from the real CFV.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@cs.stanford.edu) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Frank C. Earl
On 12 Feb 1997 22:08:37 GMT, jpat...@cc.hut.fi (Jani Patokallio)
wrote:
[ Snippage... I'll deal with the other, first part of you post in the
next post...]
>Even if everything you allege were to be true, you'd still have a hard
>time coming up with the 21 extra YES votes needed for passage and you
>have provided no hard evidence whatsoever for your assertions.
Don't be too sure about that. From the way you sound you would
already know the outcome of the vote if we re-ran it right now.
That's very suspicious, IMNSHO. From the traffic I've been skimming
in the news.* hierarchy, it sounds like there were rumblings on the
lists that intimated that we weren't going to make it- long before the
vote was over with. That, in and of itself, bothers me a bit.
>Do you have any acks for uncounted votes?
No. But we do have evidence of at _least_ 8 instances that occured
somewhere just before the deadline that didn't get accepted by the
program for varied reasons (I was one of the people that sent the vote
in but didn't get an ack or anything). You're just now beginning to
see some of the people questioning what went on and asking questions
about what exactly went on. Aren't we entitled to ask questions?
> Do you have messages exhorting people to vote against the groups with
> tampered ballots included?
No. That's a _silly_ thing to suggest we have. We're checking into
the discrepancies at this point. If the yes votes are going to be as
scrutinized as they have, the no votes _need_ to be treated in the
same manner. Otherwise, the whole vote that we just took on the
prospect of the two new groups is a sham. Everyone involved with this
wants this put to bed in a hurry- one way or another; making it all
look on the up and up is in all's best interests in this respect.
Acting in a silly manner when someone is making the initial comments
about the vote- simply assuming that the complaintants are having a
bout of sour grapes is plain rude and does nothing to fix the
situation.
> Do you have a copy of a page from the votetaker's personal diary where
> he confesses to being a devotee of the foul B'harne?
Um, that's inexcusably condescending. You might want to think about
the kind of thinking that could have produced such tripe in a
legitimate comment about thier feelings about the vote. I personally
don't think the way you just attributed to whole group asking for the
new groups and I know for a fact that the rest of us don't think that
way either. This is no better than the clowns that come into the
extant alt.* groups we currently reisde in accusing us of having no
life. Suffice it to say, you obviously don't know us, so please don't
insult the intelligence of all parties (yourself included) by making
further silly remarks like the above.
--
Frank C. Earl
Software Engineer,
Diamond Head Software, Inc.
(DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in this post in no way reflect the
views of my employer.)
--
Frank C. Earl
Software Engineer,
Diamond Head Software, Inc.
(DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in this post in no way reflect the views of my employer.)
Richard H. Miller
Melanie Davies (ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk) wrote:
: > sch...@physik.tu-berlin.de Georg Schwarz NN
: This one doesn't seem to exist either (can't be found in university database).
That will be a surprise to Georg. He is a very active poster using this address
in the wwii group.
Frank C. Earl
[Snippage]
>Huh? Mr. Schröder is a regular voter who votes on many proposals (and both
>YES and NO, for that matter). All of Mr. Schröder's votes come from
>the 'list-votes' address and he has every right to create an alias for
>easier filing of mail. This is exceedingly flimsy evidence for a
>conspiracy.
However, list-votes is a suspicious name for a vote sent. It's not
something we're saying is invalid- we're saying it's suspicious and
that we're voicing these suspicions. If, perhaps Mr. Schröder could
validate this statement, it would calm some things down.
>I suspect many Europeans felt, like myself, that creating -two- worldwide
>newsgroups for a TV program aired almost exclusively in the US would be
>silly, especially when this program happens to be a particularly inane
>kids' show. I, personally, didn't care enough to vote against it, but
>I can imagine that some would.
In light of that statement, do you think one would have been
acceptable? If we don't get a re-vote, we'll be reopening the issue
at the end of the 6-month moratorium period on the prospects of the
newsgroups- we'd like to allay all the complaints that the people had
as best we can. If you think the show is never likely to show over in
your country, you may be in for a surprise. Lyons Group has already
gotten the show to play in the UK and several other European
countries. What's to say they won't get your country to play it next?
>: :a...@contract.co.uk Alan Fleming NN
>:
>: No one, including those in the UK checking results, have been able to
>: connect to contract.co.uk or locate it for verification.
>
>As has already been pointed out, there are many, many machines on the
>'Net that are not directly accessible; just try verifying the existence
>of my home computer brahman.nullnet.fi, which is connected only by a chain
>of UUCP links. Are you going to assert that I don't exist, just because
>whois doesn't know what or where brahman.nullnet.fi is?
We're questioning the nature of the no votes. We're not at this point
claimnng they are invalid. We are entitled to question the validity
of the no votes just as stringently as the yes votes were. Big
difference in claiming they are suspicious and we're not sure about
thier validity and out-and-out claiming they are invalid- as you
attribute to us with your response to the message posted by one of the
members of the Jihad to Destroy Barney the Purple Dinosaur.
Cheers,
Michael Davis
I've been following the discussion about the failed CFV for a while
now, and something about it disturbs me.
I, like most of the Jihad, was disappointed to see the rec groups fail
to pass. However, I was not surprised. Maybe it's just because of my
pessimistic nature, but I didn't really think that we had the support
necessary to get both the two-thirds and hundred-vote majorities
needed. I am also disappointed that we can't try again for six
months.
However, I believe that it would be best for everyone if we just let
it drop and give it another shot in six months. The arguments about
the validity of the "no" votes is not helping anyone. So far, I
haven't seen any good evidence that there was any fraud or error
designed to hinder our effort. All I *have* seen are people grasping
at straws, desperately trying to discredit any "no" voter possible.
I'm worried that all of this argument is hurting our cause. Every
post in this thread has been crossposted to news.groups. By
questioning so many people who voted "no" on the CFV, we are making
the Jihad look even worse in their eyes and the eyes of everyone in
that newsgroup. IMHO, this is making us look like a bunch of whining
babies throwing a fit because we didn't get the toy we wanted.
So, here's my suggestion: We stop trying to find some way to prove
that the results were invalid. We apologize to those people whose
votes we have called into question. We apologize to news.groups for
making such a public scene over the failed CFV. Once that is done, we
wait, patiently, gathering support and making sure that everyone
agrees to the terms of the proposal, until the six-month restriction
has passed. Then, we try again.
If we continue to complain in news.groups, we will only embarass
ourselves, and in six months, people will only remember the whining,
complaints, and suspicions, earning even more "no" votes. If we make
a bad impression now, it could destroy whatever chance we still have
to get a new newsgroup.
This is all my opinion, but I feel that it might be better to exercise
a little more caution in this matter. Comments, useful criticism, and
discussion are all welcomed. Flames will be mostly ignored, but I
hope we're above that. :)
---
Fleet Adm. Michael Davis, Blood Jihad Space Fleet
hype...@concentric.net
BJSF Web Page: http://www.concentric.net/bjsf/bjsf.html
Melanie Davies
About three of these which looked suspicious to me have proved to be not suspicious
(from posts I've read on news.groups), so far. The rest of them could be perfectly
valid as well (there's a big difference between something being a bit suspicious and
something being invalid). Even if some of them are invalid it isn't enough to give
the neccessry amount of votes for the groups to be passed.
> >
> > Votes in error
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(snipping)
> > ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk Melanie Davies
> > !Invalid CFV
>
>
> I just checked back with the 2nd CFV and I'm not the only one on this list that was
> listed as having made a valid vote in the 2nd CFV that has been listed as invalid
> CFV, if they all messed up too then ok, but why wasn't this posted in the 2nd
> CFV??!??!!
> The ones who's votes were valid in the 2nd CFV are:
> aste...@pacific.telebyte.com
> DW...@bofh.mi.org
> frances...@williams.edu
> JADC...@ARTSU1.watstar.uwaterloo.ca
> Jbu...@ksu.edu
> Ke...@sun1.uconect.net
> mam...@garnet.acns.fsu.edu
> ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk
> sir...@blues.jpj.net
>
> Out of 16 votes in error, 8 of them were listed as valid at the time the 2nd CFV was
> posted, and a lot of them, all but one actually, I recognise as regulars on a.b.4d
> who I think it's pretty likely would have voted yes.
>
Someone who read my original post suggested I email the vote taker, I've done this and
am now ready to drop my complaint about this. It seems that these votes were
originally given the benefit of the doubt but an irregularity in the voting surfaced
three days before the result was posted which caused these to be declared invalid (for
more on this read Jeremy Billones followup to Deadlock's post in this thread). I'm
still not amused that I didn't find out about this in time to revote but given the
fact that it wouldn't have altered the outcome anyway and that it was so close to the
final result I'm happy to drop this. I voted from the CFV sent to a Jihad only
mailing list (I was having problems mailing from netscape at the time), but was not
persuaded by anyone how to vote.
I voted yes for both groups, but I can see the points of some people who opposed these
groups. I think it's in everyone's best interest to drop this, and for those who
still want new Barney groups created to think about coming up with a proposal which is
satisfactory to enough people, to get new Barney groups (whatever they are called)
created. I also think it would be a good idea for people involved with the Jihad to
make sure no such voting irregularities occur next time we get to vote on the creation
of new Barney groups (this isn't aimed at anyone in particular, more anyone who
contributed to this list of voting irregularities, including myself (though I assure
you I didn't knowingly do anything wrong, I now know a lot more about the RFD, CFV
process than I did when this started)).
The only other thing I want to say is thank you to Jeremy Billones (the vote taker),
and anyone else who offeres their input during all this.
Melanie
Commander Davies
TRES Corps Alpha squad
DeadLock the Feral (NYAR!)
jpat...@cc.hut.fi (Jani Patokallio) pontificated:
:: :list-...@dream.hb.north.de Martin Schr"oder NN
:: ^^^^^^^^^^
:Huh? Mr. Schröder is a regular voter who votes on many proposals (and both
:YES and NO, for that matter). All of Mr. Schröder's votes come from
:the 'list-votes' address and he has every right to create an alias for
:easier filing of mail. This is exceedingly flimsy evidence for a
:conspiracy.
Maybe it's just me, but listservs usually have words like: list, link,
serv, or some similar nomenclature to indicate their function to someone. If,
as you say, list-votes is indeed a mail alias, then it is an exceedingly poor
choice for one as I'm not the only person who wondering exactly what it was.
:This is exceedingly flimsy evidence for a conspiracy.
You know, what I find interesting about this sentence and a previous
comment by someone else "So you're saying all European countries should have
only one vote?" is that I never said either of these things I've been accused
of posting or implying. I never said "there was a European Conspiracy[tm] to
stop our groups." Nor did I ever say "the United States should get as many
votes as it desires, while every other nation on the planet gets one vote."
What I *did* say is that there was something which appeared to be a
mail alias or listserv, and given the prevalence of European No votes, began
to wonder if it really was a listserv. I'm sorry, but I don't see how I
stated European countries' voting should be limited or that they were out to
get us. If anyone needs a check on the nationalist sensitivity meter, it's
not myself.
:: Looking over the results, I see a relatively substantial number of
:: double No votes coming from European countries. This is the first time I've
:: gone over CFV results in detail, even read the full list of who voted, but it
:: seems rather questionable, given the list-votes, that all those people would
:: have voted No.
:I suspect many Europeans felt, like myself, that creating -two- worldwide
:newsgroups for a TV program aired almost exclusively in the US would be
:silly, especially when this program happens to be a particularly inane
:kids' show. I, personally, didn't care enough to vote against it, but
:I can imagine that some would.
Ask yourself this: how legitimate are all the soc.culture.*,
rec.sport.*, rec.gardening.*, and nearly every other newsgroup on UseNet if
they have to appeal to a global audience? Are the Chinese justified in voting
No on rec.sport.football.american (or whatever) because they don't play it?
Are Americans justified in voting No on a newsgroup like
rec.sport.basketball.european?
I don't think so. I always had the impression that voting was based
either on a) interest in the groups, b) name-space, or c) the group's
viability. Item A has never been a problem for us -- 5 years after
newgrouping ab4d we're still talking. There was no problem with B: ratb.{c,c}
was a proposal without any fitting precedent and thus the names most fitting
the topic were chosen. Other naming suggestions didn't fit either b/c of the
hierarchy choice or b/c they didn't adequately express the intended convo.
Item C is also not a problem b/c of Item A.
Several people have expressed sentiments in threads scattered about
news.groups that they "don't want news.groups become a political arena." I've
always voted Yes on groups which met name-space requirements and had a
legitimate topic. If I personally felt the group was silly or offensive for
some reason, I skipped voting on it entirely or abstained.
What you're saying above is that No votes could have very well easily
have been motivated by political sentiments. Unless news.groups is going to
open a three-ring in the immediate future, I don't think *anyone* wants to set
a precedent for accepting political votes. I honestly can't believe that
*any* group on UseNet is going to political and personal-opinion vote since
humans are notorious for not getting along.
I also can't accept a political vote on a CFV as even passingly valid.
:: :a...@contract.co.uk Alan Fleming NN
:of my home computer brahman.nullnet.fi, which is connected only by a chain
:of UUCP links. Are you going to assert that I don't exist, just because
:whois doesn't know what or where brahman.nullnet.fi is?
First off, contract.co.uk is a dial-up domain name, as confirmed by
its admins. Second, if I can't find your machine on the net after a
reasonable number of search attempts, it's reasonable to wonder if you may not
exist. Is it incorrect of me to draw this conclusion?
:: Given all of the above, I think a re-vote is merited.
:
:Even if everything you allege were to be true, you'd still have a hard
:time coming up with the 21 extra YES votes needed for passage and you
:have provided no hard evidence whatsoever for your assertions.
Given 32 Jihaddi who didn't register ballots, I don't think we'd have
any problem whatsoever. :)
:Do you have a copy of a page from the votetaker's personal diary where he confesses to
:being a devotee of the foul B'harne?
And you're a UVV who's job is to be objective? Heh, I raise
legitimate questions and get treated to sarcasm or thinly veiled ridicule for
speaking my mind. Nice.
:Jani Patokallio
DLtF(NYAR!)
Majse (DaenaSunne)
On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 00:08:45 GMT, fe...@dhs.com (Frank C. Earl) wrote:
>On 12 Feb 1997 22:08:37 GMT, jpat...@cc.hut.fi (Jani Patokallio)
>wrote:
>
<snipped>
>>Do you have any acks for uncounted votes?
>
>No. But we do have evidence of at _least_ 8 instances that occured
>somewhere just before the deadline that didn't get accepted by the
>program for varied reasons (I was one of the people that sent the vote
>in but didn't get an ack or anything). You're just now beginning to
>see some of the people questioning what went on and asking questions
>about what exactly went on. Aren't we entitled to ask questions?
>
I voted the night before the deadline, I never got any acknowledgement of
my vote, but it showed up on the list as being valid. (actually I voted
twice, the first one I goofed up and it didn't show up in the invalid list,
nor did I get any e-mail telling me it was invalid......)
{side note}
I don't see any valid reason for anyone to get defensive over the fact that
some people think they have spotted a few inconsistancies and want them to
be checked out. By getting defensive you are only going to make it look
like you are hiding something.....................
{ end of side note}
TA! and sorry for any misspelled words....I'm tired.
=DaenaSunne=
Http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/3613
E-mail: daena...@inorbit.com
|________________________________________________|
Russ Allbery
Sigh. I really actually get along fairly well with at least some of you.
I know some of you from elsewhere. I strongly considered voting for the
.creative group. But you all are really getting on my nerves.
DeadLock the Feral (NYAR!) <dead...@one.net.no.spam> writes:
> Myself and several others have reviewed the results and found several
> discrepancies and a couple of highly questionable things.
You're doing an absolutely pathetic job of it, frankly. Rebutting all of
these produced by people who don't know how to validate addresses is
getting a bit old.
>> list-...@dream.hb.north.de Martin Schr"oder NN
> This is some sort of mail distribution alias, probably a listserv, on
> hb.north.de's TCP/IP LAN.
You don't know that. I could vote from Russ.A...@eyrie.org, which is a
perfectly valid e-mail address which reaches me, and it wouldn't show up
on expn, finger, or any other tool you're using. And it would accept mail
just fine.
> Looking over the results, I see a relatively substantial number of
> double No votes coming from European countries. This is the first time
> I've gone over CFV results in detail, even read the full list of who
> voted, but it seems rather questionable, given the list-votes, that all
> those people would have voted No.
Why, and why does this have anything whatsoever to do with the address
from which one person chose to vote?
I can guess why you're getting a large European vote, actually. It's
probably because you're trying to create a world-wide newsgroup for an
American show. That's a legitimate, in my opinion, reason to vote no; it
means you'll need to demonstrate more interest in order to pass the
groups.
>> a...@contract.co.uk Alan Fleming NN
> No one, including those in the UK checking results, have been able to
> connect to contract.co.uk or locate it for verification.
Sigh. That's because you apparently don't even know what an MX record
is.
cyclone:~> host -t mx contract.co.uk
contract.co.uk MX 5 rhyme.contract.co.uk
contract.co.uk MX 10 gandalf.globalnet.co.uk
contract.co.uk MX 20 relay.bt.net
cyclone:~> expn a...@rhyme.contract.co.uk
[rhyme.contract.co.uk]
Disabled.
So, in other words, rhyme.contract.co.uk has chosen to tell you that it's
none of your business what users have accounts there. As is their right.
Do you have some reason for suspecting that this user doesn't exist?
>> Joel.Br...@mrash.fr Joel Brogniart NN
> Apparently an invalid userid and domain.
Wrong. As I pointed out in another post. It's a perfectly valid domain,
as one can easily see:
cyclone:~> host -t mx mrash.fr
mrash.fr MX 10 DOCSRVR.mrash.fr
It's a slow link, so you do get occasional timeouts when trying to verify
the user, but the user is valid.
>> sch...@physik.tu-berlin.de Georg Schwarz NN
> Cannot confirm this person actually exists in his institution. There's
> a Schwartz on the physics staff, but no Schwarz.
And he is required to be publically registered why? There is such a thing
as privacy. The account accepts mail fine. That's sufficient to prove
that it is a valid vote unless you have some real evidence to the
contrary.
>> d...@tink.com Deborah Kapell:> NN
> This person is not a user at tink.com. Possible forgery.
This is the *only one* any of you have been right about. That's obviously
not going to change the results. Now would you kindly stop wasting
everyone's time with these rather annoying attempts to nitpick the voting
list?
> These are all members of the Jihad, in most cases people who have been
> frequent posters to ab4d for 6 month or more, and Yes votes. As you had
> asked about in mail, I sent a raw copy of the CFV to a Jihad member-only
> listserv so that people who no longer had ab4d on their servers, or a
> severely lagged server, could vote on it.
That was a mistake, wasn't it? It was, in fact, PRECISELY WHAT THE CFV
SAID NOT TO DO. What part of the following quote from the CFV did you
fail to understand?
| The purpose of a Usenet vote is to determine the genuine interest of
| persons who would read a proposed newsgroup. Soliciting votes from
| disinterested parties defeats this purpose. Please do not redistribute
| this CFV. If you must, direct people to the official CFV as posted to
| news.announce.newgroups.
> For example, more than a few members of the Jihad have news server which
> either get articles 7 to 14 days after the original posting date or have
> an extremely limited space, such as a couple of gigs(1), which keeps
> posts from hanging around for any time.
Then they should have asked the votetaker for a copy of the CFV, which he
would have been happy to provide. Or gotten the CFV from DejaNews.
> It's really a mystery to me why these votes were just declared invalid
> without any checking on the details whatsoever, which had already been
> discussed in private mail.
Because the votes were sent in response to an invalid CFV.
> The language of the CFV doesn't explicitly prohibit forwarding of the
> CFV to inherently interested parties (those reading and posting to the
> NG)
Yes, it does. Read the above. "Please do not redistribute this CFV."
Period. Full stop.
> Finally, I read through the list of votes and noticed that at least 15
> people who informed me they voted were not counted at all in any of the
> CFV postings. Several individuals from the muohio.edu, xu.edu, uc.edu,
> aol.com, netcom.com, and other domains were not counted in this process
> despite repeated attempts at voting from their account.
Do they have their voting acks? If they attempted to vote and never got
acks, they should have mailed the votetaker to tell them that, or brought
it up on news.groups.
> As well, a couple of people reported bounces from vot...@clark.net when
> attempting to send in their ballots.
I assume they resent their ballots until they were successful?
> Given all of the above, I think a re-vote is merited.
Not unless you can provide evidence for some real irregularity rather than
nit-picking a vote which wasn't even very close.
Joe Bernstein
In article <330286e6....@news.one.net>, dead...@one.net.no.spam
(DeadLock the Feral (NYAR!)) wrote:
>jpat...@cc.hut.fi (Jani Patokallio)
wrote:
[quoting DeadLock?]
>:: Looking over the results, I see a relatively substantial number of
>:: double No votes coming from European countries. This is the first time I've
>:: gone over CFV results in detail, even read the full list of who voted,
but it
>:: seems rather questionable, given the list-votes, that all those people would
>:: have voted No.
>
>:I suspect many Europeans felt, like myself, that creating -two- worldwide
>:newsgroups for a TV program aired almost exclusively in the US would be
>:silly, especially when this program happens to be a particularly inane
>:kids' show. I, personally, didn't care enough to vote against it, but
>:I can imagine that some would.
>
> Ask yourself this: how legitimate are all the soc.culture.*,
>rec.sport.*, rec.gardening.*, and nearly every other newsgroup on UseNet if
>they have to appeal to a global audience?
Um, fully.
People all over the world garden.
People all over the world follow - for example - baseball. Perhaps you've
heard that it's popular in Central America and Japan? Let alone, say,
soccer...
People all over the world are interested in various cultures. Just look
into the soc.culture.* groups and see how many different places the posters
are. Admittedly, in *some* soc.culture.* groups the posters are mostly of
a single *ethnicity*, but as far as I know a worldwide group of Hmong or
Frenchmen is just as worldwide as a worldwide group of diplomats, or
whatever you're imagining is sufficiently global.
I, personally, have been actively involved in opposing groups which ought
to be in us.* because they're of strictly local interest, but which
nevertheless are put forward for the Big 8. Frankly, people of other
countries don't show up in news.groups in the first place looking for a Big
8 group, they know better, so I don't need to stop them (although recently
I've been pretty loud about ensuring that English remains acceptable on all
Big 8 groups, since you asked...)
From this thread I think I've learned that some opposition to this proposal
may have resulted from a belief that it was a strictly local idea for a
group, and that this opposition was probably misguided in view of the
program "Barney" being aired outside the US. I would suggest that both
supporters and opponents of the group failed to deal with this matter
appropriately: supporters should have known, and will certainly know in
future, that global interest is a criterion; opponents should have spoken
up during the RFD debate, and I can't say I'm happy that they just waited
to vote NO instead.
>Are the Chinese justified in voting
>No on rec.sport.football.american (or whatever) because they don't play it?
>Are Americans justified in voting No on a newsgroup like
>rec.sport.basketball.european?
If the Americans are persuaded that the group would be wasting space on
every non-European news server, because European basketball draws no
interest outside Europe, I'd consider that they had a point, frankly. Even
though Europe is intrinsically international and has something like three
times the population of the US... As for football, well, don't get me
started.
There's a newsgroup out there (if it didn't fail its vote) for some British
soap opera. I considered opposing it, but then I was informed that it also
airs in Canada. That was good enough for me.
> I don't think so. I always had the impression that voting was based
>either on a) interest in the groups, b) name-space, or c) the group's
>viability.
Namespace, despite your most evasive comments on that issue, is precisely
what the global-interest criterion is about. Some groups do not belong in
the Big 8; their names should start with something other than comp.*,
humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, or talk.*.
It's unfortunate that Americans have so far been too arrogant, by and
large, to bother creating a working national hierarchy (although us.* does
in fact exist). It doesn't mean we get to do as we please with namespace.
If we fill up the Big 8 with American-interest groups - and I've seen
proposals that really invited that - we will wind up with an American-only
hierarchy by default, and we'll all be the poorer for it.
> Several people have expressed sentiments in threads scattered about
>news.groups that they "don't want news.groups become a political arena." I've
>always voted Yes on groups which met name-space requirements and had a
>legitimate topic. If I personally felt the group was silly or offensive for
>some reason, I skipped voting on it entirely or abstained.
Well, people differ. I've certainly voted NO on technical grounds, and in
a couple of cases on other grounds as well. And I consider your voting YES
on a group you don't personally intend to read, which you say you do
routinely, to amount to lying to news-admins worldwide about the need for
that group.
In any event, news.groups *is* a political arena. It's about the
allocation of disk space on computers around the world, and it can get
contentious. That doesn't mean that decisions should be made carelessly.
I'd really recommend the next proposal be written differently. To be
honest, it never occurred to me that a show as successful as "Barney" would
*not* have been shown overseas, so I didn't think about the global-interest
criterion; for the failure to suggest it, I apologise. Regardless, the
copiously footnoted, wildly over-written document we were asked to consider
as an RFD did not show the benefit of careful reading of the RFD-writing
FAQs, and it looks like that cost you guys in a rather unexpected way.
Too bad. I didn't vote YES because I wouldn't have used either group, but
I was sorely tempted to. In *my* mind you guys had made a fine case for
the move (despite the style of your RFD), and because ab4d is a fine
tradition of Usenet. I would really suggest that you come back in six
months with a better-planned effort: no "vote YES" campaigns, and the RFD
equivalent of a starched shirt and tuxedo.
Joe Bernstein
--
Joe Bernstein, writer, bank consultant, and bookseller j...@sfbooks.com
speaking for myself and nobody else http://www.tezcat.com/~josephb/
Steven Garman
W A R N I N G
The following is not for the humor impaired. It is also not
for those who are on Lithium-based or Prozac-like medication
or sedatives, and therefore cannot stand the impact of raw
Reality against their tender personalities.
YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED
Sign here to show that you have read and understand this warning:
_________________________________
Name:
Date:
Notary Mark:
12 Feb 1997, jpat...@alpha.hut.fi (Jani Patokallio) wrote:
/DeadLock the Feral (NYAR!) (dead...@one.net.no.spam) wrote:
/:Myself and several others have reviewed the results and found several
/:discrepancies and a couple of highly questionable things. They are outlined
/:below.
/
/And you're about to hear that myself and several others have reviewed the
/review of the results and found several discrepancies and a couple of
/highly questionable things. Now, I'm not Jeremy Billones, but:
[SNIPPED: A lot of the usual, pathetic, lawyer-ly whining by
dead...@one.net.no.spam, of the type that accompanies nearly any
vote result nowadays. Does the term "sore loser" ring any bells?
HINT: I am quite sick of seeing this sheep-like bleating after
vote results. All of that "Baa! Baaa!" will drive you *nuts*.]
/:[..European No Votes from France, Germany, Norway, Finland, etc..]
There are only 400 million people in those areas. That DOES seem suspicious.
/:Looking over the results, I see a relatively substantial number of
/:double No votes coming from European countries. This is the first time
/:I've gone over CFV results in detail, even read the full list of who
/:voted, but it seems rather questionable, given the list-votes, that all
/:those people would have voted No.
Yes, it is quite suspicious that anyone would have voted other than what
you wanted. Personally, I say kill them. *THAT*'ll teach people to
exercise their right to vote, I must say. Uppity Euros!
/I suspect many Europeans felt, like myself, that creating -two- worldwide
/newsgroups for a TV program aired almost exclusively in the US would be
/silly, especially when this program happens to be a particularly inane
/kids' show. I, personally, didn't care enough to vote against it, but
/I can imagine that some would.
Whoa! That's not the issue. Those Europeans are Up To Something. Why, it
is a Conspiracy! Just nullify the votes, Jani. If we keep up this line of
attack, we'll get rid of all -- or enough -- of those pesky NO votes. Viva
la Promotia!
/::a...@contract.co.uk Alan Fleming NN
/:
/:No one, including those in the UK checking results, have been able to
/:connect to contract.co.uk or locate it for verification.
<SARCASM mode=intense>
OH MY GAWD! There's certainly no precedent for this on the net. After all,
every account on the net repsonds to finger; every machine responds to
ping; all user databases are not only publicly accessible, but they are
correct, complete and verifiable; etc. Yes, this alleged "Alan Fleming"
person and "a...@contract.co.uk" account must be imaginary, since the rest of
the net is so darned sound and responsive.
</SARCASM>
The Fleming account is a non issue. Quit blowing smoke in our faces,
dead...@one.net.no.spam; news.groups is supposed to be a smoke-free
environment as specified under Federal USA regulations. You could be
fined $50 for your first offense. The punishment for the second offense
is simply too terrible to speak of in a public forum.
/As has already been pointed out, there are many, many machines on the
/'Net that are not directly accessible; just try verifying the existence
/of my home computer brahman.nullnet.fi, which is connected only by a chain
/of UUCP links. Are you going to assert that I don't exist, just because
/whois doesn't know what or where brahman.nullnet.fi is?
Jani ... how do we know that YOU even exist? <suspicious> Did you vote NO
on this proposal too?
/:Given all of the above, I think a re-vote is merited.
Bullshit.
/Even if everything you allege were to be true, you'd still have a hard
/time coming up with the 21 extra YES votes needed for passage and you
/have provided no hard evidence whatsoever for your assertions.
No need to go against news.groups tradition. Hard evidence would spoil all
the fun by exposing the complete and utter fucking lack of solid evidence
that underlies accusations against a vote result that someone didn't like.
The entire concept of democracy here should just be junked; that's all they
are really saying. ... AND it's about time we did, since all of the public
debate and opinion leads to results that the people don't want (well, the
people who *matter*, anyway, like dead...@one.net.no.spam).
/Do you have any acks for uncounted votes?
Don't be silly. That would also go against the news.groups tradition. The
thing to do after a vote result that you don't like, is to say (almost
verbatim):
And several people I know didn't get their
votes counted in the vote results.
When queried about the vote ack, you get one of two standard responses:
1. <silence>
2. I/we don't have the vote ack/s. BUT THAT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE
<blah blah "revolution of the proletariat" blah blah "price of tea
in China" blah blah "never put salt in your eye" etc.>
/Do you have messages exhorting people
/to vote against the groups with tampered ballots included? Do you have
/a copy of a page from the votetaker's personal diary where he confesses to
/being a devotee of the foul B'harne?
The last would be MOST incriminating. Contact Interpol and kick in the
votetaker's door to GET THAT DIARY.
--
Steven Garman <suga...@world.std.com>
Remove the "X" in my address or your REPLY will BOUNCE back to YOU.
"Outta fucking control and loving every minute of it."
Melanie Davies
Joe Bernstein wrote:
>
> In article <330286e6....@news.one.net>, dead...@one.net.no.spam
> (DeadLock the Feral (NYAR!)) wrote:
(snippage throughout)
>
> There's a newsgroup out there (if it didn't fail its vote) for some British
> soap opera. I considered opposing it, but then I was informed that it also
> airs in Canada. That was good enough for me.
>
If you were informed that Barney aired in the UK, would that be good enough?
It doesn't air all the time, only during school holidays, but there are a load of
Barney videos in all the video shops and plenty of Barney toys, even a Barney
magazine. There was one person on a.b.4d recently saying she was from a
non-English speaking country and that her daughter watched barney, she didn't say
where she was from but from her post I'd say it was oustde the US or UK, so Barney
is not confined to the US, people in other countries have to suffer the plush
demon too :o)
> > I don't think so. I always had the impression that voting was based
> >either on a) interest in the groups, b) name-space, or c) the group's
> >viability.
>
> Namespace, despite your most evasive comments on that issue, is precisely
> what the global-interest criterion is about. Some groups do not belong in
> the Big 8; their names should start with something other than comp.*,
> humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, or talk.*.
>
> It's unfortunate that Americans have so far been too arrogant, by and
> large, to bother creating a working national hierarchy (although us.* does
> in fact exist). It doesn't mean we get to do as we please with namespace.
> If we fill up the Big 8 with American-interest groups - and I've seen
> proposals that really invited that - we will wind up with an American-only
> hierarchy by default, and we'll all be the poorer for it.
>
I agree with that but don't think it applies here because Barney does air outside
the US.
Raphael Quinet
In article <330327...@hermes.cam.ac.uk>, Melanie Davies <ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk> writes:
|> Joe Bernstein wrote:
[...]
|> > There's a newsgroup out there (if it didn't fail its vote) for some British
|> > soap opera. I considered opposing it, but then I was informed that it also
|> > airs in Canada. That was good enough for me.
|>
|> It doesn't air all the time, only during school holidays, but there are a load of
|> Barney videos in all the video shops and plenty of Barney toys, even a Barney
|> magazine. There was one person on a.b.4d recently saying she was from a
|> non-English speaking country and that her daughter watched barney, she didn't say
|> where she was from but from her post I'd say it was oustde the US or UK, so Barney
|> is not confined to the US, people in other countries have to suffer the plush
|> demon too :o)
I spent most of last year in Sweden. One day, I was greeted on T.V. by a
cute purple dinosaur. Guess who that was? I don't remember on which
channel it was, but it was definitely our beloved friend with his silly
songs and brain-washing talks.
|> I agree with that but don't think it applies here because Barney does air
|> outside the US.
Confirmed. Alas! :-)
-Raphael
Emma Pease
Can you please learn to make your lines shorter than 75 characters.
I've reformatted below. Note I have made a couple of previous posts
addressing some of the allegations but those appeared only in
news.groups. Followups on this to news.groups only.
In <330240...@concentric.net> Vic Kevlar <x5...@concentric.net> writes:
>Alright. If this person exists, as you have validated, then fine.
>That's one off the list. How about the rest of the *highly*
>questionable "no" votes, such as the one whose username is
>"list-votes," the one that is a user mask for eight different
>addresses, and etc.? (They were all mentioned in the original post
>that you replied to, so I'll spare you the bandwidth.)
That so called user mask is just a side effect of finger showing
everyone on that computer with Magnus as a given name (I checked).
Only one person has the email 'Magnus'. I mean if the same finger
existed on one of the machines I have an account, nine 'emma's would
show up but I'm the only one with the email 'emma'.
>I'm not accusing anyone, only wondering why it was so easy to find
>problems with "yes" votes that in most people's opinions weren't even
>real problems, and nothing seems to have been done to even the most
>glaring discrepancies and breeches of the rules with "no" votes.
You have yet to show any problems with the 'no' votes that do not have
simple answers.
In addition some on the 'yes' side engaged in a campaign to canvass
votes via email which in and of itself would be enough to call this
vote into question if you had actually managed to rack up enough 'yes'
votes.
Emma
who did not vote on this issue
--
\----
|\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster
|_\/ em...@csli.stanford.edu Die Luft der Freiheit weht
Russ Allbery
In news.groups, Jaina <Jaina> writes:
> So are you saying that even though you recognize Deadlock's statement
> (about the CFV *not* specifically prohibiting its forward via email to
> obviously interested parties who may have difficulty accessing usenet)
> as true,
Deadlock's statement is false. The CFV specifically prohibits that.
> Presumably, the whole point of having a rule (if there is in fact one)
> against an email requesting votes is to prevent parties who would not
> normally be interested in the topic in question (or those who are
> unrelated to activities involving, in this case the new ngs,) from
> voting at someone else's request, and voting the way they are told.
Part of the purpose is to get everyone to come to one place to vote, with
the hope that they will therefore see at least *some* of the discussion
and be informed voters, rather than just seeing a CFV. Another part of
the purpose is to ensure that the CFV is unedited; when it is distributed
to private e-mail lists, there is no way to ensure or check that. Another
part is to ensure that the CFV is presented in an unbiased fashion, not
accompanied by one-sided campaigning for the vote. Apparently the latter
happened in this case.
> I realize I am not aware of all the rules involving the CFV, so I may be
> making untrue assumptions. All I know is that my vote was invalidated,
> and I resent that the reason seems to be that someone else assumed that
> I am a mindless puppet, voting the way someone else told me to, simply
> because of the fact that I got a ballot through email.
The assumption isn't that you are a mindless puppet. The assumption is
that you and the proponents didn't follow the clear instructions in the
CFV.
Jim Riley
In article <E5JHL...@world.std.com> Steven Garman wrote:
>12 Feb 1997, jpat...@alpha.hut.fi (Jani Patokallio) wrote:
>/I suspect many Europeans felt, like myself, that creating -two- worldwide
>/newsgroups for a TV program aired almost exclusively in the US would be
>/silly, especially when this program happens to be a particularly inane
>/kids' show. I, personally, didn't care enough to vote against it, but
>/I can imagine that some would.
>
>Whoa! That's not the issue. Those Europeans are Up To Something. Why, it
>is a Conspiracy! Just nullify the votes, Jani. If we keep up this line of
>attack, we'll get rid of all -- or enough -- of those pesky NO votes. Viva
>la Promotia!
Are Finns even Europeans? Do we actually have any proof that Finland
even exists? And what about all those people who used to post
anonymously from penet.fi? I smell a conspiracy. Should we
cross-post to a.r.s? Does anyone know whether Barney is a
Scientologist?
--
Jim Riley
Knight of the Elmo
Vic Kevlar <x5...@concentric.net> writes:
> Not only that, but
> some addresses don't even appear to be people at all. (The most obvious
> example being the "person" with the username "list-votes".)
As a wacky and no doubt untenable idea, why not try e-mailing this
suspicious address?
--
"Just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so the strength of our
liberty depends upon the chaos and cacophony of the unfettered speech the
First Amendment protects."--Judges Dolores K. Sloviter, Ronald L. Buckwalter
and Stewart Dalzell.
elmo mor...@physics.rice.edu
http://www.bonner.rice.edu/morrow
Emma Pease
>In news.groups, Melanie Davies <ml...@hermes.cam.ac.uk> writes:
>>> d...@tink.com Deborah Kapell NN
>> Not a user at this domain.
>You appear to be correct there.
I did a dejanews search (filter search for sender d...@tink.com) on the
name. For someone who might not exist she seems to have posted some
45 odd times in the last couple of years. The address could be a
forwarding/posting address which she keeps because she might change
ISPs frequently.
Emma
followups to news.groups
Deus ex Machina
Emma Pease (em...@Kanpai.Stanford.EDU) wrote:
: Can you please learn to make your lines shorter than 75 characters.
: I've reformatted below. Note I have made a couple of previous posts
: addressing some of the allegations but those appeared only in
: news.groups. Followups on this to news.groups only.
I've set followups to ab4d and atb because this discussion is quite
relevant to those ngs.
: In <330240...@concentric.net> Vic Kevlar <x5...@concentric.net> writes:
: >Alright. If this person exists, as you have validated, then fine.
: >That's one off the list. How about the rest of the *highly*
: >questionable "no" votes, such as the one whose username is
: >"list-votes," the one that is a user mask for eight different
: >addresses, and etc.? (They were all mentioned in the original post
: >that you replied to, so I'll spare you the bandwidth.)
: That so called user mask is just a side effect of finger showing
: everyone on that computer with Magnus as a given name (I checked).
: Only one person has the email 'Magnus'. I mean if the same finger
: existed on one of the machines I have an account, nine 'emma's would
: show up but I'm the only one with the email 'emma'.
Right. Understandable. End of issue, I would hope.
: >I'm not accusing anyone, only wondering why it was so easy to find
: >problems with "yes" votes that in most people's opinions weren't even
: >real problems, and nothing seems to have been done to even the most
: >glaring discrepancies and breeches of the rules with "no" votes.
: You have yet to show any problems with the 'no' votes that do not have
: simple answers.
Perhaps; nonetheless we can not be blamed for examining the issue; it is
important to us. Perhaps some have gone about it a bit zealously, but
again- that's life. It's to be expected in a situation like this.
As well, those moderating and helping in the implementation of the CFV
have been equally zealous in their defense. If there is any culpability in
this, it's equals out.
: In addition some on the 'yes' side engaged in a campaign to canvass
: votes via email which in and of itself would be enough to call this
: vote into question if you had actually managed to rack up enough 'yes'
: votes.
Fine. We disagree, and you disagree, and neither of us are very likely to
convince the other any time soon. I suggest that we wait the six months,
which will be difficult for us due to our present position, but
nonetheless seems to be the only way to go if we expect to have a chance
at it later. It is therefore my suggestion that both sides just let the
issue drop for now, to be picked up at a later date. Hopefully, neither
side will hold a grudge and we can hammer this out again in the six months
specified.
: Emma
: who did not vote on this issue
: --
: \----
: |\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster
: |_\/ em...@csli.stanford.edu Die Luft der Freiheit weht
M I D W E S T E R N E R S A G A I N S T U G L Y L I Z A R D S
Most Holy, Commanding Officer
Dean, M.A.U.L. War College CINC, Ohio Theater Member, G-Team
* ===>Mail me for info on M.A.U.L. Membership!<=== *
-*-
L E G I O N O F D O O M
Brigadier General Director, DeSpongification Division
Member, Jihad Council of Veterans
Steven Garman
_W_A_R_N_I_N_G_
What follows may be more sarcasm than mere mortals can handle.
Check with your doctor before continuing. YOU MUST sign here
that you understand the risks of reading this message:
________________________________
Name:
Date:
Notary Mark:
Thu, 13 Feb 1997, fe...@dhs.com-NO_SPAM (Frank C. Earl) whined:
/12 Feb 1997, jpat...@cc.hut.fi (Jani Patokallio) wrote:
/[Snippage... I'll deal with the other, first part of you post in the
/next post...]
/>Even if everything you allege were to be true, you'd still have a hard
/>time coming up with the 21 extra YES votes needed for passage and you
/>have provided no hard evidence whatsoever for your assertions.
/
/Don't be too sure about that. From the way you sound you would already
/know the outcome of the vote if we re-ran it right now. That's very
/suspicious, IMNSHO.
Yes, you are right. I find it *suspicious* that Jani would make such a
mathematical assessment. It's too simple. Jani's up to something. :^P
<raspberry sound>
/From the traffic I've been skimming
/in the news.* hierarchy, it sounds like there were rumblings on the
/lists that intimated that we weren't going to make it- long before the
/vote was over with. That, in and of itself, bothers me a bit.
No, Frank, those rumblings had to do with an imbalance of gas in your
intestines. I recommend that you see a doctor for that, since it is
affecting your mind. All of that gas is making you PARANOID.
Look behind you, Frank.
/>Do you have any acks for uncounted votes?
/
/No. But we do have evidence of at _least_ 8 instances that occured
/somewhere just before the deadline that didn't get accepted by the program
/for varied reasons (I was one of the people that sent the vote in but didn't
/get an ack or anything). You're just now beginning to see some of the
/people questioning what went on and asking questions about what exactly
/went on. Aren't we entitled to ask questions?
DIDN'T I PREDICT THIS? I certainly DID predict this. On the early morning
of 13 Feb, I wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
When queried about the vote ack, you get one of two standard responses:
1. <silence>
2. I/we don't have the vote ack/s. BUT THAT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE
<blah blah "revolution of the proletariat" blah blah "price of tea
in China" blah blah "never put salt in your eye" etc.>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
It looks like Frank C. Earl has chosen to use Standard Response #2.
Frank, you don't have vote acks. You have no evidence. Shut up and go away
until you do. Your lack of evidence makes your claims specious, fraudulent,
or just plain foolish. AS I'VE WARNED PEOPLE BEFORE, news.groups is a SMOKE-
FREE ZONE under the Federal laws of the United States of America. You can
be fined FIFTY DOLLARS for the first offense of blowing all of that smoke.
Frank, when those people voted, did they bother to read the CFV? (Did any
of them bother to keep a copy?) It states quite clearly that you should
receive a vote ack. You should look for your vote ack. If you oops-ied
and didn't bother to notice that you didn't get a vote ack, then too bad
for you.
/>Do you have messages exhorting people to vote against the groups with
/>tampered ballots included?
/
/No. That's a _silly_ thing to suggest we have.
Yes, that would be hard evidence, and true to news.groups tradition, you are
lacking in hard evidence of vote fraud.
/We're checking into the discrepancies at this point.
Yes, please do. One wonders why you, Frank, didn't do this "checking"
before opening your flippin' mouth on our time and looking like a twit
without a shred of solid evidence. Perhaps you think that we here on
news.groups have nothing better to do than deal vacuous claims of vote
problems. These claims seem to follow every vote. And the outcome is
tiresomely the same: nothing.
/If the yes votes are going to be as scrutinized
/as they have, the no votes _need_ to be treated in the same manner.
/Other-wise, the whole vote that we just took on the prospect of the
/two new groups is a sham.
Funny, but the inegrity of the vote-taker and the procedure of the voting
should have made all reasonable attempts at voting quite solid.
Face Facts: With hundreds of votes, the votetaker can only use best
judgement as constrained by the voting procedure. This means that some
forged votes can get through. I mean, *I* have two accounts. At first
glance, they have no visual connection between them. I could use them to
vote twice for newsgroups. (NOTE: I don't. That's vote fraud.) How is
the votetaker or even a first-layer investigator going to discover that?
Answer: They aren't. Thus probably there is some vote fraud. Probably
there will ALWAYS be some vote fraud, just like probably there will ALWAYS
be people who vote against a moderated newsgroup.
If all votes were rigorously checked, the newsgroup creation process would
grind to a halt. So it is not done. And I don't take people seriously who
attempt it. Besides, the people who attempt it are the sore losers from
failed votes anyway. Why should I take their word for it? Even the
"evidence" they may give, is suspect considering the source.
Frank, just give it up. Go home and lick your wounds. You have 6 months
so you can salve a lot of wounds in that time.
/Everyone involved with this wants this put to bed in a hurry-
/one way or another;
This is most sensible thing you've said so far. AIN'T IT TOO BAD that you
don't recognize that your "evidence" is too flimsy. What a yawner.
/making it all look on the up and up is in all's best interests in this
/respect.
/Acting in a silly manner when someone is making the initial comments
/about the vote- simply assuming that the complaintants are having a
/bout of sour grapes is plain rude and does nothing to fix the situation.
As far as I'm concerned, you are the one that needs fixing. You have
raised some spectacular nonissues about the votes. These nonissues were
so spectacular that I composed an extermely sarcastic message about them.
And I am continuing to do so.
One person has even come onto the newsgroup and said "hey that's *my*
address, and I certainly exist, and it's a valid NO vote". You are being
debunked. So, stop bunking. Either produce solid evidence, or disappear.
(Better yet, don't disappear, and participate in news.groups by guiding
newsgroup creation and in debunking the claims of sore losers.)
/>Do you have a copy of a page from the votetaker's personal diary where
/>he confesses to being a devotee of the foul B'harne?
/
/Um, that's inexcusably condescending.
Nope. I excuse. A little humor is perfectly fine, especially with people
who are too humorless (like Frank C. Earl?) and cannot stand having their
little worlds poked fun of. Barney the Fucking Purple Dinosaur is amusing.
So is the Jihad. Heck, the entire basis of the Jihad seemed to have humor
as one intent. Why stop now? Answer: Because it suits your little agenda
against Jani and the vote?
/You might want to think about
/the kind of thinking that could have produced such tripe
"Frank C. Earl" type of tripe, no doubt. At least you're qualified to know
tripe when you see it.
/in a legitimate comment about thier feelings about the vote. I personally
/don't think the way you just attributed to whole group asking for the
/new groups and I know for a fact that the rest of us don't think that
/way either.
We can all vote our conscience, then. HEY! WAIT! YOU DID! And you lost.
Come back in six months with a stronger case and a stronger ability to
promote the newsgroup you want. It's been said that the newsgroup creation
process is a big measure of the proponent's ability to campaing and promote.
You've 6 months to learn how. Get cracking; you seem to have a ways to go.
/This is no better than the clowns that come into the
/extant alt.* groups we currently reisde in accusing us of having no
/life. Suffice it to say, you obviously don't know us, so please don't
/insult the intelligence of all parties (yourself included) by making
/further silly remarks like the above.
<yawn> What a paper tiger. Don't go away angry, just GO AWAY.
--
I certify that I am: Steven Garman
I have included no address because we should all debate in public.
Direct ALL responses to the PUBLIC forum.
Those who e-mail me about this topic will have their letters posted publicly.
Steven Garman | Attack Dog of Usenet {TM} | BARK! BARK!
Jerry Dallal
Steven Garman (xxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
: Frank, you don't have vote acks. You have no evidence. Shut up and go away
: until you do. Your lack of evidence makes your claims specious, fraudulent,
Well, *I* have my ack and I'm happy to mail it to you!
Of course, the votetaker *counted* my vote just to confuse the issue,
but this is just further evidence of the sinister fraud that the
followers of the Purple Pile are trying to perpetrate. :-)