CFV: soc.culture.sindhi
Jan Isley
FIRST CALL FOR VOTES (of 2)
unmoderated group soc.culture.sindhi
Newsgroups line:
soc.culture.sindhi Discussion group for Sindhi people around the world.
Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC, 20 Jun 1996.
This vote is being conducted by a neutral third party. Questions
about the proposed group should be directed to the proponent.
Proponent: Rajesh Kirpalani <raj...@bnr.ca>
Proponent: Deepa Makija <hbac...@huey.csun.edu>
Mentor: ri...@bcm.tmc.edu
Votetaker: Jan Isley <j...@bagend.atl.ga.us>
RATIONALE: soc.culture.sindhi
The purpose of "soc.culture.sindhi", is to host topics of interest
to the *Sindhi* community, that is those people whose ancestors
originally came from Sindh province and have a Sindhi "heritage".
The rationale for this newsgroup, is that Sindhi topics are rarely
chartered on "soc.culture.indian" or "soc.culture.pakistan" or any
other newsgroup. You may find a few topics to do with the "Sindh"
province, but these are often to do with local issues and politics.
So there is no place where the Sindhi culture, traditions are discussed.
One question which will be asked is 'Why don't you call your newsgroup
"soc.culture.pakistan.sindh' The answer is many communities who *now*
live in the Sindh province are in fact NOT Sindhi by heritage and have
their own culture and traditions. Such communities have no interest in
the Sindhi culture.
To add more background; At the time of the partition of India and
Pakistan in 1947, there have been significant population movements
in the Sindh Province. Many Sindhis moved out of Sindh. So much so,
that you could say the *Sindhi* people have become a geographically
distributed community. Not only are there Sindhi communities in India
and Pakistan but throughout the world. The Sindhi culture crosses
national and religious boundaries. This is why the the proposed
newsgroup is called "soc.culture.sindhi".
Another question likely to be asked is 'Why don't you call your
newsgroup "soc.culture.sindh" ?', this would suggest some form of
political statement !
The proposed newsgroup is meant for all *Sindhis* throughout the world,
and is to help promote the feeling of a global Sindhi community.
CHARTER: soc.culture.sindhi
The unmoderated newsgroup soc.culture.sindhi shall be a forum where
all the Sindhis and non-Sindhis can express, share, and exchange their
views, ideas, and feelings about the Sindhi culture - in a free and
friendly atmosphere.
Possible discussion issues include :-
- culture, history, philosophy, ideology, geography;
- societies, traditions, customs, religion;
- literature, poetry, arts, music, folklore;
- languages, books;
- travel;
- food, cookery;
- local events, festivals, conferences, news, programs;
- communities abroad, problems, needs; and
- *things* normally discussed in the "soc.culture" newsgroups.
All are welcome to participate.
Issues related to politics, language, religion, and such
are to be discussed in a non-abrasive fashion.
Discussions promoting or advocating 'hatred' especially based on
language, religion, ethnic origin, etc. are not to be conducted.
This group is unmoderated, and flame wars, and bad language are
strongly discouraged. Discussions of this nature should be taken to
alt.flame. Binary postings and chain letters are prohibited.
END CHARTER.
HOW TO VOTE:
You should send E-MAIL (posts to a newsgroup are invalid) to:
Please do not assume that just replying to this message will work.
Check the address before you mail your vote. Your mail message
should contain one and only one of the following vote statements:
I vote YES on soc.culture.sindhi
I vote NO on soc.culture.sindhi
You may also vote ABSTAIN or CANCEL but these are not counted as valid
votes for the total count.
NAMES ARE REQUIRED. If your mail software does not indicate your name,
include the following statement and add your name (on the same line).
(example voter name) Voter Name: John Smith
Voter Name:
IMPORTANT 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. Votes mailed by WWW/HTML/CGI
forms are considered to be anonymous votes.
Vote counting is automated. Failure to follow these directions may
mean that your vote does not get counted. If you do not receive an
acknowledgment of your vote within three days contact the votetaker
about the problem. It's your responsibility to make sure your vote
is registered correctly. 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 distribute
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 is generally considered to be vote fraud.
When in doubt, please ask the votetaker.
--
Jan Isley <j...@bagend.atl.ga.us> | Running UseVote 3.
votes to: <usenet...@mathcs.emory.edu> | Powered by FreeBSD
Jan Isley
LAST CALL FOR VOTES (of 2)
Jan Isley
unmoderated group soc.culture.sindhi fails 348:197
soc.culture.sindhi results - 545 valid votes
Yes No | 2/3 >100 | Pass | Group
---- ---- | --- ---- | ---- | -------------------------------------------
348 197 | No Yes | No | soc.culture.sindhi
1 abstaining vote and 18 invalid votes
A five day discussion period follows this announcement. Unless
serious allegations of voting irregularities are raised, the group
may not be voted on again for six months.
Newsgroups line:
soc.culture.sindhi Discussion group for Sindhi people around the world.
Votes closed on 23:59:59 UTC, 20 Jun 1996.
This vote was conducted by a neutral third party. Questions
RATIONALE: soc.culture.sindhi
CHARTER: soc.culture.sindhi
END CHARTER.
UseVote 3.0 Vote Acknowledge - (c) 1993,94 Ron Dippold
Don't forget to 'uvdup' to get rid of duplicates first!
soc.culture.sindhi Final Voter list
Voted YES
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
emi...@ns2.emirates.net.ae Rajesh Hemrajani
ma...@ns2.emirates.net.ae Sumeet Valrani
vin...@ns2.emirates.net.ae Vinod A. Manghnani
so...@stanilite.com.au G Soni
som...@latcs1.cs.latrobe.edu.au Somnath Ghosh
mot...@geko.net.au Sanjeev Motwani
kko...@panther.ab.ca Kumud Kokal
C...@blakes.ca Camille Joly
bh...@freenet.carleton.ca Kris Bhojwani
di...@freenet.carleton.ca Manu Khemani
LAL...@tc.gc.ca Ramesh Lalwani
gur...@ott.mpr.ca Sunil Gurnani
nau...@nortel.ca Nauman S. Khizar
raj...@nortel.ca Rajesh Kirpalani
ram...@gov.on.ca Chandru N. Ramchandani
by...@freenet.toronto.on.ca Khalid A. Hashmani
Ani...@ceo.sts-systems.ca Anita Butani
vksh...@acs.ucalgary.ca Vijay Kumar Shrivastava
OGU...@sask.usask.ca Oguocha Ike
e0fk...@credit.erin.utoronto.ca Ahmer A. Karimuddin
jhin...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca Justin Rohal Hingorani
yu11...@yorku.ca Dinesh Ranjit Wadhwani
satish....@lgx.unisys.ch Satish Lalwani
raj...@netup.cl Rajesh Motwani
har...@22support.com haresh m. advani
Malkani_Haresh_G/atc_ma...@atc.alcoa.com Haresh G. Malkani
Prakash_H...@mail.amsinc.com Prakash Hariramani
AKh...@aol.com Ashok I.Khushalani
BAM...@aol.com Basheer A. Mahar
BHI...@aol.com Al Memon
Bur...@aol.com Pete Burgos
Haj...@aol.com Hajra Khatoon
INN...@aol.com Fayaz Ahmad
Itu...@aol.com Mumtaz Ishaq Tunio
Jcore...@aol.com Juanita Corea
Knn...@aol.com Nadir Hussain
KRa...@aol.com Kamal Ramani
mand...@aol.com Manda Snow
Mani...@aol.com Manisha Mirchandani
Monst...@aol.com Mona Mirapuri
Sha...@aol.com Shanker Lakhwani
Vasw...@aol.com Anil Vaswani
Viper...@aol.com Charles Sisk
san...@ateam.com Sanjil M. Ramchandani
gpai...@atmsys.com Gurjeev S. Paintal
pmam...@bighorn.dr.att.com Praveen Mamnani
na...@acdn.ho.att.com Nadir Sherali
jes...@microcosm.SanDiegoCA.ATTGIS.COM Vinod Jessani
pr...@bestweb.com Naresh P. Sadhnani
lak...@cadence.com Vikram Lakhani
vis...@cais.cais.com Deepak Hathiramani
avi...@global.california.com Avinash Ramchandani
haj...@caribsurf.com Amitabh Hajela
Sunil.A...@cdc.com Sunil Wadhwa
10010...@CompuServe.COM Ibrahim Aladwani
10322...@CompuServe.COM Sangeeta H. Daryanani
7377...@CompuServe.COM PAUL E. PEGORS
mah...@pixel.convex.com Mahesh Ramchandani
ma...@corus.com Manoj Ramchandani
ars...@cqt.com Malik F. Arshad
sh...@cray.com Sharan Kalwani
ra...@Jaxom.Eng.PKO.DEC.Com Rajen Sham Ramchandani
d...@bwalk.dm.com Dr. Dimitri Vulis
mla...@ezl.com Mazhar Lakho
Karan....@FMR.Com Karan Punwani
span...@FreeMark.COM Sani Panhwar
has...@hpcc107.corp.hp.com Hassan Haider Naqvi
hi...@hphci36.rose.hp.com Hiren Chandiramani
acha...@hudsonet.com Arun Chandra
ah...@VNET.IBM.COM Kohsher Ahmed
k...@VNET.IBM.COM Kishore Jotwani
lak...@icacomp.com Shailesh Lakhani
SRamch...@icfkaiser.com Sameer Ramchandani
ambw...@idirect.com Vikash Ambwani
gob...@inctech.com Gobind Jhangiani
rav...@inctech.com Raveen Jhangiani
Sun...@inctech.com Suneel Jhangiani
az...@informix.com Aziza Faruqi
san...@informix.com Sandeep Mirchandani
vmak...@ingr.com Vinod Makhija
pri...@intercall.com Pritam Mulchandani
mel...@interlog.com Arvind Melwani
pa...@interlog.com Trevor Tymchuk
daci...@iohk.com Shalini Mirchandani
raj...@gramercy.ios.com Rajesh Khot
dee...@styx.ios.com Deepak Thadani
mhot...@kaiwan.com Mahesh Hotchandani
b...@macsch.com Bhoomaiah Alishetti
ar...@gate.maloca.com Viki Cristie
tu...@popmail.mcs.com Mohammad Ishaq Tunio
ashok_ma...@Merck.Com Ashok Maheshwari
Paresh....@merisel.com Paresh Jamnadas
sud...@mindspring.com Sudish Joseph
rku...@etsd.ml.com Rajesh Kuwar
mah...@ritz.mordor.com Mahesh Panjwani
Anil_Bh...@msn.com Anil Bharvaney
ol...@viking.mv.com Olav Nieuwejaar
vazi...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM Deven
nare...@ix4.ix.netcom.com Naresh Makhijani
jdw...@ix.netcom.com Kanayo Wadhwani
sbal...@ix.netcom.com Suresh A. Balchandani
sjad...@ix.netcom.com Sanjay Jadvani
tgr...@ix.netcom.com Tom Griffin
zam...@ix.netcom.com ZAMEER SOOMRO
mi...@netcom.com Sunil Mirapuri
ma...@netscape.com Manoj Khiani
aj...@nexgen.com Ajaz Memon
Prakas...@nike.com Prakash Uttam
UDUD...@us.oracle.com Umesh Dudaney
san...@pathcom.com Sanjay Dayalani
zu...@pixi.com Zubin Gidwani
kcol...@primenet.com Kelli Oliver
chi...@readings-fun.com Mahesh Rajani
gab...@readings-fun.com Gabriel Anwar
an...@narmda.asd.sgi.com Anil Khubchandani
at...@yamuna.asd.sgi.com Atul Narkhede
kam...@gemini.corp.sgi.com Kamlesh Keswani
pri...@viman.engr.sgi.com Prince Kohli
gulr...@tulsa.dowell.slb.com Sunil N. Gulrajani
su...@srtrading.com Sunil Jeswani
Bob_Bryan_at_S...@stream.com Bob Bryan
John_Vitiello_at...@stream.com John Vitiello
Robert_Duarte_at...@stream.com Robert Duarte
Shahnawaz_Soomro_a...@stream.com Shahnawaz Soomro
Steve_Carbone_at...@stream.com Steve Carbone
vis...@hsmpk12a-55.Eng.Sun.COM Vishal Sharma
jh...@Synopsys.COM Jackie Howe
ar...@devnull.mpd.tandem.com Arun Swaminathan
mmak...@tellabs.com Munesh Makhija
ch...@ksc8.th.com chuan thakur
mir...@ksc8.th.com Prakash Bhojwani
to...@dlep1.itg.ti.com Ashish Gokhale
Sunder_S...@UB.com Sunder M. Shivdasani
zu...@wolfenet.com Harish Gidwani
MAHT...@hcc01.babson.edu Indu Mahtani
RAMA...@bentley.edu Ritesh Ramani
mak...@po.EECS.Berkeley.EDU Vikram Makhija
ra...@milo.berkeley.edu Rahul L. Keswani
drk...@uclink3.berkeley.edu Dhiruj Kirpalani
raj...@acs.bu.edu Rajesh N. Keswani
ra...@acs.bu.edu Rajwinder Singh
mra...@MED-ANAT61.BU.EDU Muhammad Ramzan
chat...@catalysis.eng.buffalo.edu Ajay Chatlani
sac...@andrew.cmu.edu Sachal Lakhavani
mee...@CMU.EDU F. Meena Lakhavani
hl...@columbia.edu Haresh Aidasani
ro...@crux4.cit.cornell.edu Rohan Oberoi
su...@betti.tam.cornell.edu Sunil Raj
a...@ee.duke.edu Anoop Ghanwani
za...@shangchun.mathcs.emory.edu Zulfiqar Ali Memon
li...@emory.edu Reeta Sinha
JHAN...@FDUSVRT1.FDU.EDU Girish G. Jhangiani
bos...@popmail.firn.edu Alok K. Bose
dt...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu Dayal Mirchandani
gl...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu Srikanth R. Yaragudi
gt0...@prism.gatech.edu Vipin Ramani
JH...@Getty.edu Ju Hui "judy" Han
ear...@turbo.KEAN.EDU Ekta Arora
jna...@turbo.KEAN.EDU Jyoti Monica Navani (The Bombay Princess)
bo...@marais.math.lsu.edu Lewis Bowen
an...@impala.ir.miami.edu Anil Narwani
pade...@mtu.edu Prasanna A. Deshpande
pcha...@lynx.dac.neu.edu Prita Chatwani
e1...@eiger.ceet.niu.edu Manish Rawtani
apha...@Oakland.edu Amit Harchandani
gmel...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu Geetu Melwani
vidy...@math.ohio-state.edu Vidhyanath K Rao
bas...@okstate.edu Farrukh Bashir
da...@okstate.edu Mukesh Bhagwandass Bhawnani
jok...@okstate.edu Yousuf Khan Jokhio
ma...@okstate.edu Adnan Manan
sal...@okstate.edu Salman Abdul Qadir
vka...@okstate.edu Vinod Katepally
akgo...@sacam.OREN.ORTN.EDU Anil K Goklaney
GC96...@PACEVM.DAC.PACE.EDU sanjay achharya
gh...@cs.pitt.edu Sunondo Ghosh
shss...@pitt.edu Sheikhaqib Shahnawaz
KJAG...@POMONA.EDU Karishma Jagtiani
r...@chem.psu.edu Reena Bhatia
ax...@psu.edu Akhlesh Lakhtakia
v...@expert.cc.purdue.edu Vivek Sabhachandani
vi...@cs.rice.edu Vivek Sadananda Pai
isl...@mail1.its.rpi.edu Asad Islam
thar...@fidelio.rutgers.edu Ramesh Tharwani
sab...@paul.rutgers.edu Sarmad Abbasi
mya...@physics.rutgers.edu Mahesh Yadav
az...@leland.stanford.edu Azer Mustaqeem
ra...@leland.Stanford.EDU Ravi Suresh Belani
ah...@nova.stanford.edu Bilal Ahmad
njot...@attila.stevens-tech.edu Neeraj Jotsinghani
man...@top.cis.syr.edu Manoj Gunwani
pau...@astro.ocis.temple.edu Pam Austin
ri...@bcm.tmc.edu Richard H. Miller
uq...@casper.med.uth.tmc.edu Usman Qazi
GKR...@tntech.edu Gurbax Ramchandani
an...@ecf.toronto.edu Anish Kirpalani
agho...@eng2.uconn.edu Anindya Ghoshal
mohan....@ucop.edu Mohan W. Sitlani
npie...@sdcc13.ucsd.edu Nathan R. Pietila
adas...@ucsd.edu Adarsh Daswani
co...@cogsci.uiuc.edu Jennifer Cole
ag...@cs.uiuc.edu Gul Agha
jam...@cs.uiuc.edu Nadeem Jamali
re...@cs.uiuc.edu Uday Reddy
tu...@students.uiuc.edu AAMIR TURK
pun...@service1.uky.edu Naresh G. Punwani
DIN...@UKCC.UKY.EDU Dinesh Arjun Mirchandani
VBE...@UKCC.UKY.EDU Vinod Belani
kes...@UMDNJ.EDU Rohit Keswani
at...@eecs.umich.edu Atri Indiresan
pal...@umich.edu Paul Alukal
vis...@umich.edu Vishen Mohandas
gmi...@CCTR.UMKC.EDU Ghulam Haider Mirjat
Laxman....@BANYAN.UMMED.EDU Laxman Gangwani
wadh...@msi.umn.edu Dinesh Wadhwani
m...@umr.edu Irfan Malik
ra...@uoknor.edu Raja Bhojwani
ba...@upenn5.hep.upenn.edu Azhar Basit
br...@pollux.usc.edu Bapa Rao
ka...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Kamal Lakhani
pri...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Praveen(Pritty) Sahijwani
sum...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Sumeet Hingorani
pee...@hpcf.cc.utexas.edu Mohammad A Malik (Gorsi)
ftal...@uts.cc.utexas.edu Francesca P Talenti
nab...@uts.cc.utexas.edu Nabeel Zuberi
abb...@weiss.che.utexas.edu Faraz Abbasi
ana...@cs.utexas.edu Ananda M. Kar
gha...@cs.utexas.edu Mohammad Faisal Siddiqui
yous...@cs.utexas.edu Asim Y. Ghanchi
kacp...@ece.utexas.edu Dominik Kacprzak
ma...@ece.utexas.edu Sadia Malik
sha...@ece.utexas.edu Saghir A. Shaikh
che...@mail.utexas.edu Chetan Kapoor
jw...@brazos.pe.utexas.edu Jiachuan Wang
peh...@brazos.pe.utexas.edu Janaka Paulis
mat...@csgrad.cs.vt.edu Anup Mathur
npi...@gopher.chem.wayne.edu Noor A. Pitafi
ra...@cistia.es Antonio Raju Chetwani
ada...@idec.es Amar Daryanani
sur...@jet.es Suresh Narwani
chai...@cc.helsinki.fi Hussain Chaikh-Hamad
dahl...@cc.helsinki.fi Susanne Dahlgren
wide...@cc.helsinki.fi Risto Widenius
SAM...@Elo.Helsinki.fi Samaneh Khader T
abel...@cc.hut.fi Belahcen Anouar
sa...@cc.hut.fi Sami El-Madhoun
ho...@freenet.hut.fi Hoslo Jiwa
dahl...@katto.kaapeli.fi Taina Dahlgren
rek...@katto.kaapeli.fi Juha Rekola
jo...@inferno.pp.fi Carl Johan Patrik Swanljung
Matt...@mhome.pp.fi Matti Aho
raj...@sindhu.pp.sci.fi Niranjan Rajani
das...@agf.fr DASWANI Moti
arc...@hsc.fr Vincent Archer
Ollivie...@hsc.fr Ollivier Robert
nsam...@gibnet.gi Neil Samtani
yl...@clerk.house.gov Yousef Lasi
mem...@box-m.nih.gov Sarfraz Memon
h945...@hkursc.hku.hk Neeta Dadlani
nav...@rad.net.id Navin Washi Nanwani
kes...@indigo.ie Nanik P. Keswani
vmah...@vsnl.net.in Vivek Mahtani
bat...@sindhu.theory.tifr.res.in Raju N. Bathija
manz...@is.aist-nara.ac.jp manzoor hashmani
jays...@canacad.ac.jp Jayshee Ramani
zah...@kuis.kyoto-u.ac.jp Zahooruddin Shaikh
rkri...@csfb.co.jp Ravi Kripalani
an...@timeware.co.jp Anita Daryanani
kir...@bora.dacom.co.kr Kirshma
va...@isis.org.lc Mahesh Vasnani
ram...@cs.fsas.upm.edu.my akramani
ecl...@accent.net Manoj Balani
hi...@achilles.net Suresh Hingorani
ja...@aloha.net Ayesha Gidwani
an...@asiaonline.net Anand D. Panjabi
an...@asiaonline.net Anoop Shamdasani
dasw...@asiaonline.net Haresh Daswaney
sac...@newton.crisp.net Sachin Gogri
raj...@earthlink.net Gul Advani
mso...@mistik.express.net Mustafa Soysal
hes...@fly.HiWAAY.net Will Hester
asa...@ibm.net Shirley Asandas Daryanani
har...@ibm.net Prakash Harchandani
uto...@infolink.net Rickesh Kishnani
hi...@hk.linkage.net Hiro Daryanani
mirc...@popalex1.linknet.net Christopher L. Mirchandani
sh...@nyx.net Shrisha Rao
raj...@rahul.net S. Rajeev
bgo...@sonic.net Brett Goetschius
jaya...@HK.Super.NET Jaya
imcs!AS...@uunet.uu.net Aslam Parvez Memon
imcs!BHA...@uunet.uu.net Masood Ahmed Bhatti
imcs!MAN...@uunet.uu.net Manohar Lal
imcs!SAL...@uunet.uu.net Muhammad Saleem Memon
suj!I...@uunet.uu.net Dr. Imdad Ali Ismaili
suj!N...@uunet.uu.net Naz Sahito
suj!QA...@uunet.uu.net Ghulam Qadir Mallah
Ajit.D.@vol.net Ajit Dhansinghani
ITa...@why.net IQBAL TAREEN
Qadee...@why.net Qadeer A. Qazi
ing...@james.avh.unit.no Ingunn Limstrand
iva...@james.avh.unit.no Ivar Chavannes
HKha...@amnesty.org Harris Khalique
har...@compass.com.ph Haresh Daswani
ah...@biruni.erum.com.pk Ahsen Abro
am...@biruni.erum.com.pk Mohammad Aminuddin
ja...@biruni.erum.com.pk Jaffar Raza
sho...@biruni.erum.com.pk Shomyl Ahmed Brohi
uma...@biruni.erum.com.pk Umaimah Ali
uqa...@biruni.erum.com.pk M. Hussain Uqaili
aj...@nankani.khi.erum.com.pk AJEET NANKANI
jai...@mat.uc.pt Jaime C. Silva
fkb...@singnet.com.sg Faisal Khan Baluch
lal...@singnet.com.sg lalwani anil
makh...@singnet.com.sg Ahmed H. Makhdoom
odin...@singnet.com.sg HARESH.K.TECKWANI
vke...@singnet.com.sg Vashdev Khialani
su...@ncb.gov.sg Suman Balani
kha...@pacific.net.sg Narwani Khasham
nwmi...@pacific.net.sg Indrajit Advani
raj...@pacific.net.sg Rajan G. Ramchandani
gob...@mozart.inet.co.th Gobind S. Nandwani
kbh...@mozart.inet.co.th Sajini Kishore Bharvaney
mah...@mozart.inet.co.th Dinesh Nirmal Mahtani
rut...@mozart.inet.co.th Rupa & Roma Uttamchandani
das...@asiaonline.net.tw Dinesh Daswani
mt...@aber.ac.uk Matthew Joseph Smith
S.L.V...@bton.ac.uk SURESH LACHMANDAS VASNANI
su...@esc.cam.ac.uk Suman Chowdhury
a...@tattoo.ed.ac.uk Anup Pradhan
9501...@student.gla.ac.uk Rubina Noor Shaikh
LLY...@vme.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk Ajay Advani
kgid...@jesus.ox.ac.uk Karen Gidwani
r...@sable.ox.ac.uk Roshan Daryanani
steve...@brasenose.oxford.ac.uk Steve Gough
asheesh...@st-antonys.oxford.ac.uk Asheesh Advani
n.ra...@ucl.ac.uk N.Ramnani
arc...@ccl.umist.ac.uk Archana Hinduja
en...@csv.warwick.ac.uk Arwa Hassan
LU...@themis.law.warwick.ac.uk Lucy-Ann Buckley
uf...@westminster.ac.uk Naheed Talpur
cm6...@wlv.ac.uk S.Chaudhuri
Son...@lalwani.demon.co.uk Sonney Lalwani
Su...@lalwani.demon.co.uk Sunil Lalwani
mah...@easynet.co.uk Raju Mahtani
madhu.b...@etgate.co.uk Madhu Bhambhani
fli...@austin.cc.tx.us Florence Libert
Voted NO
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ras...@ns2.emirates.net.ae Dr Syed Rashid Ali
m961...@huntsman.cse.rmit.edu.au Salman Farooq
shus...@metz.une.edu.au Muhammad Sajid Hussain
et06...@student.uq.edu.au Ahmad Dahlan
s.k...@uws.edu.au Shahed Anwer Khan
sha...@nortel.ca Mohammed Shaikh
RA...@QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA Dr. Ijaz Rauf
hah...@cs.usask.ca Haikel Hichri
muf...@mackenzie.usask.ca Muhammad Farooq
ka...@smokey.forestry.utoronto.ca Kazi Islam
ya15...@alumnet.yorku.ca Naeem Siddiqi
saj...@altagroup.com Syed Jafri
wqur...@win.ameridata.com Waqar Qureshi
GinaS...@aol.com Gina Spence
Hu...@aol.com Hussein Jawad
Isph...@aol.com Imran Isphani
mo...@aol.com Moin Ansari
Mun...@aol.com Munaza Guffar
NAR...@aol.com Nargis Fatima
Shu...@aol.com Shumita Hussain
stai...@bga.com Dwight Brown
Paul....@bglobal.com Paul Ananth
za...@cutter.ds.boeing.com Ahmed B. Zayan
kausar...@boeing.com Kausar Talat
nav...@centerline.com Naveed Qazi
vi...@crystal.cirrus.com Diwakar Vishakhadatta
qur...@cisco.com Imran Qureshi
zk...@cisco.com Zulfiqar Khan
mi...@cris.com Mirza Rahmatullah Baig
jaf...@ctron.com Ali A. Jaffri
bo...@datasync.com Martin H. Booda
l...@zk3.dec.com Larry Smith
wa...@distinct.com Wajid Fiaz
ova...@edify.com Ovais Quraishi
mma...@ccm.frontiercorp.com Muhammad Malik
tariq_...@ccmail.inetinc.com Tariq Hassan
LATI...@Mattel.com Asma Latif
kha...@cig.mot.com Mohammad N. Khan
mk...@mpc-uk.com Masud Ahmed Khan
dbal...@ix.netcom.com Don Ballard
dra...@netcom.com Ryan
soh...@netcom.com Sohail Qureshi
wa...@netcom.com Waqar Malik
ra...@nsd.com Rauf Ali Adil
rossix!dav...@openlink.one-o.com David Moore
d...@panix.com Minister of Truth
im...@panix.com Imran Anwar
k...@shell.portal.com Kim DeVaughn
m...@RedBrick.COM Maxime Taksar
che...@sparco.com Mubashir Cheema
mi...@sparco.com Ghulam M. Mian
sa...@daldd.sc.ti.com Ahmad Saqib Asdi
umar....@twcable.com Umar Hamidi
sra...@uswest.com Arshad Razvi
bgh...@visa.com Bilal A. Ghayur
kh...@wangfed.com Omar Hyat Khan
pol...@uran.informatik.uni-bonn.de Andreas Polzer
IF...@enga.bu.edu Iftekhar Mahmood
tter...@flute.aix.calpoly.edu Thomas D. Terrell
mug...@alumni.caltech.edu Asim Mughal
cl...@columbia.edu Christopher Lodge Stamper
on...@anise.ee.cornell.edu Oneeb Bin Saadat
jx...@po.CWRU.Edu Jehanzeb Masud
mx...@po.CWRU.Edu Mehr Nigar
amem...@ACC.FAU.EDU Amir memon
mcho...@ACC.FAU.EDU Mohammed Amjed
szai...@ACC.FAU.EDU Syed Zaidi
ame...@cse.fau.edu Memon Ali
fk...@cse.fau.edu Fahad Khan
sil...@cse.fau.edu Syed Ilyas
sma...@osf1.gmu.edu Syed S. Masood
aa...@nedhmail.nedh.harvard.edu Ahamd N. Ali
me...@hawaii.edu Muhammad Pervaiz Meer
bha...@charlie.cns.iit.edu Shahzad Bhatti
smus...@knox.edu Shahab Mushtaq
AC41...@mu2.millersv.edu Aasma Chaudhary
ir...@gnu.ai.mit.edu Iraj Mughal
pa...@lcs.mit.edu Patrick J. LoPresti
aa...@Ra.MsState.Edu Atif Ahmad Khan
smc...@hertz.njit.edu Shoaib M Chaudhry
kh...@cs.nyu.edu Hasnain Khan
akh...@ee.eng.ohio-state.edu Siraj Akhtar
ars...@ucs.orst.edu Muhammad Arshad
mal...@ucs.orst.edu Zafar Malik
wahe...@osu.edu Mian Waheed
syed...@pitt.edu Syed Ziaul Haq
cbs...@phoenix.Princeton.EDU Christopher B. Stone
sai...@cs.purdue.edu Mohammad Bashayir Said
ba...@ecn.purdue.edu Shahab Baqai
far...@ecn.purdue.edu Farhan Baqai
kh...@ecn.purdue.edu Imran Khan
shus...@gandalf.rutgers.edu Shehzad Hussain
ta...@seattleu.edu Tariq Rathore
om...@leland.Stanford.EDU Omer M. Saeed
warr...@kashmir.tamu.edu Khalid Sarwar Warraich
ad...@zirc.chem-eng.toronto.edu Adel Esayed
har...@zirc.chem-eng.toronto.edu Haroon Ikram Sheikh
jase...@eecg.toronto.edu Muhammad Jaseemuddin
ka...@UDel.Edu Obaid Kazmi
ir...@sugar.age.uiuc.edu Irfan S. Ahmad
far...@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu Farooq Saeed
ash...@gibbs.oit.unc.edu Mohammad Ashraf Chaudhary
mo...@chaph.usc.edu Zuhair Moin
sb9...@u.cc.utah.edu SALMAN BANDAY
EAB...@UOFT02.UTOLEDO.EDU Eihab Abdel-Rahman
F45E033%SAKSU00...@VTBIT.CC.VT.EDU Abdulhameed Y. Al-Mazroo
kha...@birch.ee.vt.edu Muhammad Khan
th...@maxwell.ee.vt.edu Ziyad Al-Mojaddidi
zan...@vt.edu Zafar Ansari
chau...@students.wisc.edu chaudhri rauf abdul
s00...@discover.wright.edu SYED HAQ
aha...@eecs.wsu.edu Ameer Hassan
ma...@enserg.fr Muhammad Arif
ab...@insa-tlse.fr ATHAR ABBAS
jau...@softlab.is.tsukuba.ac.jp Jauhar Ali
bz...@torfree.net Azfar Karimuddin
ih...@pak.win-uk.net IHSAN IBN ASLAM
jmub...@washington.xtn.net Jamal Mubarak
csa...@urc.tue.nl Michiel Wijers
tla...@amug.org Todd C. Lawson
dha...@hal-pc.org David L. Hanson
om...@alpha.edunet.sdnpk.undp.org Omar Ghaffar
ZALVI%sah...@edunet.sdnpk.undp.org Zafar Mahmood Alvi
has...@iban.sdnpk.undp.org Hassan Raza Naqvi
shi...@mercury.sdnpk.undp.org M Shiraz Baig
ser...@v4dev.sdnpk.undp.org Serhat Khan
ham...@mah.brain.com.pk M.A. Hameed
ir...@msalman.brain.com.pk Irfan Iqbal
af...@sofserv.brain.com.pk Aftab Butt
ah...@sofserv.brain.com.pk Ahmed Hassan
no...@sofserv.brain.com.pk Noman Haider
ra...@sofserv.brain.com.pk Muhammad Raza
hai...@biruni.erum.com.pk Hassan Haider Malik
kmi...@biruni.erum.com.pk Khalid MIRZA
nas...@akhtar.isb.erum.com.pk Naseer Akhtar
fa...@ppi.khi.erum.com.pk Fazal Qureshi
akh...@kunjah.lcci.lhr.erum.com.pk Muhammad Akhtar Mirza
a...@badar.psw.erum.com.pk Ali Mumtaz Malik
b98...@lums.edu.pk Abdullah Akhtar
pen...@bilalm.brain.net.pk Bilal Muddassir
hus...@ap2gh.fsd.brain.net.pk Ghulam Hussain
at...@infolink.net.pk Muhammad Sajjad Khan Athar
abd...@paknet1.ptc.pk Eng. Abdul Aziz
ahm...@paknet1.ptc.pk TAHIR MAHMOOD
alt...@paknet1.ptc.pk Altaf H. Reshi
aut...@paknet1.ptc.pk Amjad Riaz
com...@paknet1.ptc.pk Abdul Aleem
exp...@paknet1.ptc.pk Khalid Ahmad Khan
far...@paknet1.ptc.pk Dr Farrukh Shahzad
fua...@paknet1.ptc.pk fuad arshad
gul...@paknet1.ptc.pk Muhammad Ahmad Goheer
hme...@paknet1.ptc.pk Hafiz Allah Mehr
hy...@paknet1.ptc.pk Khalid Hyder
ie...@paknet1.ptc.pk Faiz Muhammad Khan
imr...@paknet1.ptc.pk Imran Ahmed
ish...@paknet1.ptc.pk Ishrat Jameel
itr...@paknet1.ptc.pk mr.itraf ahmed
ja...@paknet1.ptc.pk Muhammad Javed Iqbal
jmus...@paknet1.ptc.pk Javed Mushtaq
jusm...@paknet1.ptc.pk Asad Qayyum
kas...@paknet1.ptc.pk Kashif A. Sheikh
kha...@paknet1.ptc.pk Khalid Qureshi
khur...@paknet1.ptc.pk Taqdees Ahmed Siddiqi
mec...@paknet1.ptc.pk Amer HAfeez
mua...@paknet1.ptc.pk Ahmad Muaz Qamar
mun...@paknet1.ptc.pk Munsha Ahmed
nau...@paknet1.ptc.pk Nauman Bader
oba...@paknet1.ptc.pk Dr. Obaidullah
pak...@paknet1.ptc.pk Shahrukh Afzal
sal...@paknet1.ptc.pk salman qutb
sja...@paknet1.ptc.pk Shahid Jamil
supe...@paknet1.ptc.pk Moeen Ashfaq Khawaja
syb...@paknet1.ptc.pk SyberWurx UnLimited
tab...@paknet1.ptc.pk Tabish Ali
ulti...@paknet1.ptc.pk Adnan Bader
voia...@paknet1.ptc.pk voia tele tech
wam...@paknet1.ptc.pk wameez mohyuddin
was...@paknet1.ptc.pk Kh. Wasif Mustafa
za...@paknet1.ptc.pk Zahid Raza Naqvi
zah...@paknet1.ptc.pk Zahid Shafiq
sha...@cairo.ccse.kfupm.edu.sa Muhammad Shahid Shafiq
Inga.H...@patologi.uu.se Inga Hansson
Mohammad...@patologi.uu.se Mohammad Farooque
su...@proteq.com.sg Sunil Jadwani
ca...@uni-mb.si Ales Casar
m.nas...@ic.ac.uk M. NASRULLAH
ai...@sun.engg.le.ac.uk Aamer Iqbal Bhatti
phs...@south-01.novell.leeds.ac.uk Iftikhar Ahmad Khan
I.S.Mu...@student.lut.ac.uk Imran Mughal
M.N.A...@newcastle.ac.uk Muhammad Nadeem Asghar
aby...@unix.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk Mirza Ali
pmz...@unix.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk Reza Aslam
ashiq....@unn.ac.uk Ashiq Qurban
bha...@craycom.co.uk Zulf Bhatti
ha...@gharib.demon.co.uk Gharib Hanif
Mujahid.Is...@nortel.co.uk Mujahid Islam
W.A...@nortel.co.uk WAQAR AHMAD
Abstained
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
st...@mcs.com Joe Bernstein
Invalid ballots
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cor...@paknet1.ptc.pk corporate data consulting
! Invalid account
po...@paknet1.ptc.pk pakistan optimist sailing association
! Invalid account
za...@dircon.co.uk www.ummah.org.uk
! Invalid account
Bal...@aol.com
! No name given
Pu...@aol.com
! No name given
b...@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
! No name given
vij...@cdac.ernet.in
! No name given
mas...@metz.une.edu.au Muhammad Ashfaq
! No vote statement in message
hite...@ix.netcom.com Dilip Aidasani
! Vote(s) invalidated
aida...@columbia.edu Hitesh Aidasani
! Vote(s) invalidated
mn_...@stu.ust.hk Lavina
! Vote(s) invalidated
ti...@asiaonline.net Lavina Daswani
! Vote(s) invalidated
samb...@worldnet.att.net Sohail Ansari
! Vote(s) invalidated
samb...@worldnet.att.net Irfan Qureshi
! Vote(s) invalidated
samb...@worldnet.att.net Munawar Laghari
! Vote(s) invalidated
160%sah...@edunet.sdnpk.undp.org Talha Waheed Sulemani
! Vote(s) invalidated
160%sah...@edunet.sdnpk.undp.org Khurram Iqbal
! Vote(s) invalidated
160%sah...@edunet.sdnpk.undp.org Nauman Nadeem
! Vote(s) invalidated
Ameer Hassan - MME
Vijay Sadananda Pai
Ameer Hassan - MME <aha...@eecs.wsu.edu> wrote:
>For some reason, there are too many yes votes from `wanis' and `janis'.
Do you think it could be because many many Sindhis are "wanis" and "janis" ?
However, there may be too many no votes from "Ali"s and "Ahmed"s...
Vivek Sadananda Pai
In article <4r0tfe$q...@larry.rice.edu>, vija...@mridangam.rice.edu
|> In article <DtoKE...@serval.net.wsu.edu>,
|> Ameer Hassan - MME <aha...@eecs.wsu.edu> wrote:
|> >For some reason, there are too many yes votes from `wanis' and `janis'.
|>
|> Do you think it could be because many many Sindhis are "wanis" and "janis" ?
|>
|> However, there may be too many no votes from "Ali"s and "Ahmed"s...
In fact, it looks like the Pakistan contingent came out in full force,
as some of the original naysayers had suggested. Will this vote be
overturned, since the numerically fewer Sindhis are being oppressed
by the numerically superior Pakistanis?
The only objection I had seen anyone raise on this issue is that
the group should be named s.c.pakistan.sindh, rather than s.c.sindhi.
Note that the former denotes a province of Pakistan, while the
latter denotes a culture of a group of people who are geographically
diverse, especially as a result of the diaspora caused by the
Great Partition.
Will the news.groups regulars make a big fuss about this one, or
do the Sindhis not warrant any particular anguish? The s.c.pakistan
reorg was a total fiasco, and now it seems that the Pakistani vote
bloc is going to squash groups which they think belong to "them".
However, given that the scp reorg specifically sought to avoid
any regional newsgroups, it seems odd to claim that scp.sindh
should exist, alongside groups like scp.sports or scp.education.
I'd love to hear from anyone about this.
-Vivek
Jay Maynard
>Will the news.groups regulars make a big fuss about this one, or
>do the Sindhis not warrant any particular anguish?
You're one to be complaining.
However, for the record, I believe that this is just as bad as the
Indian-engineered defeat of sck.
--
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
http://k5zc.hsc.uth.tmc.edu | adequately be explained by stupidity.
"Just because I'm a superhero doesn't mean
I have to smell poo gas." -- Freakazoid
Vivek Sadananda Pai
In article <slrn44t80ki....@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>,
|> On 28 Jun 1996 15:56:31 GMT, Vivek Sadananda Pai <vi...@cs.rice.edu> wrote:
|> >Will the news.groups regulars make a big fuss about this one, or
|> >do the Sindhis not warrant any particular anguish?
|>
|> You're one to be complaining.
Given that mine has been the first message bringing up this
point, I guess my complaint, despite your implied allegation
of hypocrisy, serves a purpose.
|> However, for the record, I believe that this is just as bad as the
|> Indian-engineered defeat of sck.
Do I have to ask if you're going to petition Tale to overturn
these results and create the group, or are you going to volunteer
that bold statement yourself at this point?
-Vivek
Nadeem Jamali
On 28 Jun 1996 15:56:31 GMT, Vivek Sadananda Pai <vi...@cs.rice.edu> wrote:
>Will the news.groups regulars make a big fuss about this one, or
>do the Sindhis not warrant any particular anguish?
You're one to be complaining.
However, for the record, I believe that this is just as bad as the
Indian-engineered defeat of sck.
This doesn't make sense. All Sindhis from Pakistan also voted in favor
of soc.culture.sindhi.
Besides, here's a more important thing to look at. There are more than
50 no votes from the .pk domain. I do not believe people in the .pk
domain have access to usenet newsgroups. Considering that we have just
24 NO votes too many, these more than 50 votes make a lot of difference.
I just searched through the last two thousand messags on soc.culture.
pakistan (unmoderated) and there is not a single message from anyone in
the .pk domain. I don't see any reason why these votes should not be
discarded.
Nadeem
--
Nadeem Jamali jam...@cs.uiuc.edu
Department of Computer Science
University of Illinois-UC
Yousuf Jokhio
You are right Mr Jamali... The only time you see people with the .pk
domain on the internet is when there is a voting going on for a
newsgroup, otherwise you don't see any articles/messages posted on the
soc.culture.pakistan or any other newsgroup. If these people have any
other internet access (besides emailing), I don't understand why they
don't even care to write a line or two.......... Beats me...
Regards,
Yousuf Jokhio
Uday Reddy
>
> On 28 Jun 1996 15:56:31 GMT, Vivek Sadananda Pai <vi...@cs.rice.edu> wrote:
> >Will the news.groups regulars make a big fuss about this one, or
> >do the Sindhis not warrant any particular anguish?
>
> You're one to be complaining.
Add my voice. I urge Tale and Group Advice to set aside the raw vote
results and approve this newsgroup.
Evidently, Sindhis are a numerically smaller community and will never be
able to win against the negative voting that we see here from the
Pakistanis.
- The proponents and supporters have made a good case that the main
reason for their newsgroup to be outside the soc.culture.pakistan
hierarchy is that they intend to cater to an ethnic and cultural group
that is distributed across national boundaries.
- They have made no political statements vis a vis Pakistan. There was
no implication that their newsgroup said anything about the Sindh
provice in Pakistan.
- Theirs is an open newsgroup where anybody can post anything. There is
no criticism that they will suppress any opinions (political,
nationalistic or otherwise).
In the light of these facts, the negative voting by Pakistani community
is inexplicable. The only reason for voting NO is the contention that
this newsgroup should be within the SCP hierarchy. Logic holds no water
with these voters. This is clearly a case of the tyranny of the
majority.
Under these circumstances, it would be unfair to apply the 2/3 majority
rule to this disadvantaged community. They will never be able to have
their newsgroup given their numerical position. Please approve this
newsgroup and show your support for disadvantaged minorities.
> However, for the record, I believe that this is just as bad as the
> Indian-engineered defeat of sck.
That is not a fair assessment. Only about one-tenth of the SCIJK voters
voted against SCKashmir, and many of them for rational reasons. In
contrast, roughly half the voters of SCPakistan-reorganization voted
against SCSindhi (speaking numerically; I haven't bothered to match the
voter lists). And, they all voted NO for political/nationalistic
reasons.
Uday Reddy
Karen Lofstrom
: Will the news.groups regulars make a big fuss about this one, or
: do the Sindhis not warrant any particular anguish?
I think it was a shame that the group didn't pass, and that it seems
to have been shot down by people playing Indo-Pak war games with
newsgroups (and I hate that no matter WHAT side is doing the bloc
voting). If this group comes up again in 6 months I'll vote YES, just
as a matter of fairness.
I've trimmed the newsgroups line.
--
Karen Lofstrom SCIENTOLOGIST BAIT lofs...@lava.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
OT7-48 1. Find some plants, trees, etc., and communicate to them
individually until you know they received your communication.
Manda919
My vote is wrongly listed. I voted NO !
Please correct the listing.
--------- Here is copy of my vote ----------
Date: Fri, Jun 14, 1996 11:13 PM EDT
From: Manda919
Subj: CFV: soc.culture.sindhi
To: usenet...@mathcs.emory.edu
cc: Manda919
I vote NO on soc.culture.sindhi
Manda Snow
Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq
On Fri, 28 Jun 1996, Uday Reddy wrote:
> Evidently, Sindhis are a numerically smaller community and will never be
> able to win against the negative voting that we see here from the
> Pakistanis.
So why is that worse when the Pakistanis do similarly as the Indians do?
Is it because the former is a smaller community than the latter;-(?
I do hope that the better part of Pakistanis (as well as others) will
realize that people falling in line with inappropriate campaigning only
dishonor themselves. But to blame the Pakistanis alone in what seems to
have been degenerated into an endless online warfare is a rather
one-sided view, IMHO.
- --
Zoli fek...@bc.edu, keeper of <http://www.hix.com/hungarian-faq/>
*SELLERS BEWARE: I will never buy anything from companies associated
*with inappropriate online advertising (unsolicited commercial email,
*excessive multiposting etc), and discourage others from doing so too!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMdaN7sQ/4s87M5ohAQHVWAH9HyNSER6/aKhzzOdIendXzths8shkYzfI
HSjILwZsWV/6zKop5RpJQkuOjAXOMKZ4NA4Qk5B+KrrQrQXt2GqYew==
=4xGQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Robert Craig Harman
This is, of course, meaningless. The confirmation of the vote is
what is needed to show that you voted "NO". And since the group
failed anyway, who really cares?
...Craig
Nadeem Jamali
In article <Pine.SGI.3.91.960630...@chi3.bc.edu> "Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq" <fek...@chi3.bc.edu> writes:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Fri, 28 Jun 1996, Uday Reddy wrote:
> Evidently, Sindhis are a numerically smaller community and will never be
> able to win against the negative voting that we see here from the
> Pakistanis.
So why is that worse when the Pakistanis do similarly as the Indians do?
Is it because the former is a smaller community than the latter;-(?
Because, unlike the Kashmir newsgroups, there is no polititical
statement in soc.culture.sindhi. It was proposed as a group for
discussing the cultural heritage of the Sindhi diaspora. There are
Sindhis in Pakistan, and there are Sindhis in India, and there are
Sindhis settled all over the world, who call Hong Kong, Taiwan, UK, US
their permanent homes.
Sindh or Sindhi culture is not a legitimate Pakistan/India issue of
conflict. All Sindhis from Pakistan, Muslims and Hindus, have voted in
favor of the newsgroup, just like many more Sindhis from rest of the
world have voted for it. Even some enlightened Pakistanis other that
Sindhis have voted for the newsgroup. Almost all votes against
soc.culture.sindhi are by non-Sindhi Pakistanis, who are least
interested in anything to do with Sindhi culture.
More importantly, as I have pointed out earlier, more than 50 votes
against the newsgroup have been by people in the .pk domain. Everyone
is welcome to scan soc.culture.pakistan to find any postings from the
.pk domain. The other day, I searched the last 2000 articles, and
didn't find a single one from a site in the .pk domain. Looks like
these people don't even have access to the usenet. Why should their
votes even be considered? Let me add that even voiding of 24 of these
NO votes is enough to pass soc.culture.sindhi.
I should also add that many of the NO votes are apparently a result of
illegal canvassing. Almost all are based on nationalistic prejudices
of some Pakistanis who believe in enforcing a uniform Islamic
Pakistani culture on everyone from Pakistan... and who want to deny
Sindhis accross political/religious boundaries an opportunity to
interact.
Robert Ames
In article <Pine.SGI.3.91.960630...@chi3.bc.edu>,
"Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq" <fek...@chi3.bc.edu> wrote:
>On Fri, 28 Jun 1996, Uday Reddy wrote:
>> Evidently, Sindhis are a numerically smaller community and will never be
>> able to win against the negative voting that we see here from the
>> Pakistanis.
>
> So why is that worse when the Pakistanis do similarly as the Indians do?
>Is it because the former is a smaller community than the latter;-(?
It seems that the present voting system permits the "tyranny of the
majority". The system is not friendly to minorities who are opposed by
any larger group. It rewards intolerance.
Christopher B. Stone
Amidst all this speculation about which particular ethnic group was
"responsible" for the defeat of soc.culture.sindhi, I thought I would
elucidate why I, as a news.groups reader, voted no.
Quite simply, I voted against this group because it was unmoderated. I
personally think that all soc.culture.* groups need to be moderated, just
as soc.religion.* groups are moderated. All the ethnic bickering during
the RFD stage reinforced my impression that *this* particular group
especially needed to be moderated.
I made this comment during the RFD stage and was squarely ignored.
--
Chris Stone * cbs...@princeton.edu * http://www.princeton.edu/~cbstone
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." -Martin Luther King
Uday Reddy
Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Jun 1996, Uday Reddy wrote:
> > Evidently, Sindhis are a numerically smaller community and will never be
> > able to win against the negative voting that we see here from the
> > Pakistanis.
>
> So why is that worse when the Pakistanis do similarly as the Indians do?
> Is it because the former is a smaller community than the latter;-(?
It is not any worse. If Indians did this kind of negative voting for a
minority group, I would have asked that their vote should be set aside
too (in spite of the fact that I am myself Indian).
I should also point out that there exist Indian culture groups outside
of soc.culture.indian hierarchy, viz., soc.culture.bengali and
soc.culture.tamil. These groups were set up outside the SCI hierarchy
for the same reason as that of soc.clture.sindhi. The people of these
cultures also exist outside Indian national boundaries. There are no
indications that Indians did nationalistic negative voting against these
groups. I have pointed out this fact several times during the
soc.culture.sindhi debates. The hardened Pakistani nationalists paid no
heed to it.
If soc.culture.kashmir is what you have in mind in asking this, I did
not support the group simply because I thought the proposal was
defective. So did many others. (There is enough discussion of this
issue in news.groups archives which you are welcome to see.)
> I do hope that the better part of Pakistanis (as well as others) will
> realize that people falling in line with inappropriate campaigning only
> dishonor themselves. But to blame the Pakistanis alone in what seems to
> have been degenerated into an endless online warfare is a rather
> one-sided view, IMHO.
I agree this might seem like another instance of the online warfare.
But, dismissing it on that basis without going into the merits of the
issue is not justified, IMHO.
Uday Reddy
Eric Jaron Stieglitz
I didn't vote in this CFV because of lack of interest in the subject, but
there seem to be a few irregularities in this vote. Note that the vote
failed by only a small handful, so if the following 37 votes were
invalidated, the vote would pass the 2/3 YES mark (assuming no YES votes
were invalidated).
From the RESULT, I culled the following, which seems to indicate
massive vote solicitation at the site paknet1.ptc.pk. Especially note
that some of the votes should be invalid: Are the names "SyberWurx UnLimited"
and "voia tele tech" the names of real people? I doubt it. Why were they
counted among the list of valid votes?
After doing a search on DejaNews for *ptc.pk, I found a total of
58 articles from this domain. The first article from this domain appeared
on 5/26/96. Doing a scan of some of these articles (and from ones still
on my news spool), I found that about 20 of these were from a gated LISTSERV.
All of the others that I looked at appeared as the product of a mail-to-
news gateway. Certainly, some people from the domain are reading news,
but it doesn't appear that *ptc.pk has its own news server. The 58 articles
posted from the domain are the work of less than 10 people.
Another interesting point -- doing a quick browse through the names in
the 58 postings, I didn't find any of them listed in the RESULT postings
that I show below.
Certainly, DejaNews doesn't show who *reads* Usenet, but I'm inclined to
believe that few of the people listed below actually read any Usenet
newsgroups. It looks like massive vote solicitation.
--
Eric Jaron Stieglitz eph...@ctr.columbia.edu
Home: (212) 280-1152 Assistant Systems Manager at the
Work: (212) 854-6020 Center for Telecommunications Research
Fax : (212) 854-2497 http://www.ctr.columbia.edu/people/Eric.html
Eric Jaron Stieglitz
In article <4r7aq4$5...@sol.ctr.columbia.edu>,
I, <eph...@atlantis.ctr.columbia.edu> wrote:
>
> After doing a search on DejaNews for *ptc.pk, I found a total of
>58 articles from this domain. The first article from this domain appeared
Ooops. Actually, that's less than 40 articles ever posted from that
domain. I forgot that DejaNews chops up long articles.
Jay Maynard
On 1 Jul 1996 01:48:52 GMT, Eric Jaron Stieglitz <eph...@atlantis.ctr.columbia.edu> wrote:
> From the RESULT, I culled the following, which seems to indicate
>massive vote solicitation at the site paknet1.ptc.pk.
Why bother? After scijk, massive vote solicitation is clearly acceptable.
Ash Nallawalla
In <Pine.ULT.3.91.960628...@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu> Yousuf Jokhio <jok...@okstate.edu> writes:
>You are right Mr Jamali... The only time you see people with the .pk
>domain on the internet is when there is a voting going on for a
>newsgroup, otherwise you don't see any articles/messages posted on the
>On 28 Jun 1996, Nadeem Jamali wrote:
>> Besides, here's a more important thing to look at. There are more than
>> 50 no votes from the .pk domain. I do not believe people in the .pk
>> domain have access to usenet newsgroups. Considering that we have just
>> 24 NO votes too many, these more than 50 votes make a lot of difference.
>>
>> I just searched through the last two thousand messags on soc.culture.
>> pakistan (unmoderated) and there is not a single message from anyone in
>> the .pk domain. I don't see any reason why these votes should not be
>> discarded.
Alta Vista was not accessible when I tried, but Deja News cannot find any
news post from the .pk domain. I tend to agree with you that this is fishy
but no different from the scij-k saga that the "splutz" mentioned.
--
Managing Editor, PC Update; Vice-President, Melb PC
Director, Association of Personal Computer User Groups
rajesh kirpalani
> RESULT
> unmoderated group soc.culture.sindhi fails 348:197
>
>soc.culture.sindhi results - 545 valid votes
>
> Yes No | 2/3 >100 | Pass | Group
>---- ---- | --- ---- | ---- | -------------------------------------------
> 348 197 | No Yes | No | soc.culture.sindhi
> 1 abstaining vote and 18 invalid votes
Examination of the Voting Results reveals that 50 of the 197 "No" Votes are
suspicious and illegal.
These 50 votes came from Internet sites which provides NO NEWSGROUP ACCESS,
only email. According to the rules, people are not allowed to vote if they
don't have newsgroup access.
It appears that there has been significant campaining effort to make this
newsgroup fail.
I am asking our Votetaker to re-examine the result based on this evidence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of Suspicious votes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
37 "No" votes from "Paknet" - only provides e-mail, no newsgroup access
5 "No" votes from "sdnpk" - only provides e-mail, no newsgroup access
8 "No" votes from "brain" - only provides e-mail, no newsgroup access
---
50
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DETAILED BREAK DOWN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"brain" does no provide Newsgroup access, only e-mail. 8 votes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ham...@mah.brain.com.pk M.A. Hameed
ir...@msalman.brain.com.pk Irfan Iqbal
af...@sofserv.brain.com.pk Aftab Butt
ah...@sofserv.brain.com.pk Ahmed Hassan
no...@sofserv.brain.com.pk Noman Haider
ra...@sofserv.brain.com.pk Muhammad Raza
pen...@bilalm.brain.net.pk Bilal Muddassir
hus...@ap2gh.fsd.brain.net.pk Ghulam Hussain
"paknet" does not provide Newsgroup access, only e-mail. 37 Votes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tab...@paknet1.ptc.pk Tabish Ali
ulti...@paknet1.ptc.pk Adnan Bader
voia...@paknet1.ptc.pk voia tele tech
wam...@paknet1.ptc.pk wameez mohyuddin
was...@paknet1.ptc.pk Kh. Wasif Mustafa
za...@paknet1.ptc.pk Zahid Raza Naqvi
zah...@paknet1.ptc.pk Zahid Shafiq
syb...@paknet1.ptc.pk SyberWurx UnLimited
No real name given. 1 Votes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
d...@panix.com Minister of Truth
"sdnpk" does not provide Newsgroup access. 5 Votes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
om...@alpha.edunet.sdnpk.undp.org Omar Ghaffar
ZALVI%sah...@edunet.sdnpk.undp.org Zafar Mahmood Alvi
has...@iban.sdnpk.undp.org Hassan Raza Naqvi
shi...@mercury.sdnpk.undp.org M Shiraz Baig
ser...@v4dev.sdnpk.undp.org Serhat Khan
Rajesh Kirpalani
Proponent : soc.culture.sindhi
Jan Isley
According to Manda919 <mand...@aol.com>:
>
>My vote is wrongly listed. I voted NO !
My records show that you voted twice.
--
It takes more than a costume and an attitude to do this work. - Batman
---------- vote #1
>From Mand...@aol.com Fri Jun 14 23:14:13 1996
Received: from emout08.mail.aol.com (emout08.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.23]) by cssun.mathcs.emory.edu (8.7.5/8.6.9-940818.01cssun) with SMTP id XAA04209 for <usenet...@mathcs.emory.edu>; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 23:14:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mand...@aol.com
Received: by emout08.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA26697 for usenet...@mathcs.emory.edu; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 23:13:58 -0400
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 23:13:58 -0400
Message-ID: <96061423135...@emout08.mail.aol.com>
To: usenet...@mathcs.emory.edu
cc: Mand...@aol.com
Subject: CFV: soc.culture.sindhi
I vote NO on soc.culture.sindhi
Manda Snow
---------- vote #2
From mand...@aol.com Sun Jun 16 16:05:06 1996
Received: from ngeout01.news.aol.com (ngeout01.news.aol.com [152.163.176.81]) by cssun.mathcs.emory.edu (8.7.5/8.6.9-940818.01cssun) with SMTP id QAA14522 for <usenet...@mathcs.emory.edu>; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 16:05:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: mand...@aol.com
Received: from newsbf02.news.aol.com (newsbf02.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.50]) by ngeout01.news.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA17522 for <usenet...@mathcs.emory.edu>; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 16:07:28 -0400
Received: by newsbf02.news.aol.com
(1.38.193.5/16.2) id AA04042; Sun, 16 Jun 1996 16:04:29 -0400
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 16:04:29 -0400
Posted-Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 16:04:29 -0400
Received-Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 16:04:29 -0400
Message-Id: <960616200...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: mand...@aol.com (Manda919)
To: usenet...@mathcs.emory.edu
Subject: Re: 2nd CFV: soc.culture.sindhi
X-Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
References: <8344925...@uunet.uu.net>
In-Reply-To: <8344925...@uunet.uu.net>
I vote YES on soc.culture.sindhi
Voter Name: Manda Snow
rajesh kirpalani
Just in case people think this is this a Indo-Pak thing,
read on...
The <soc.culture.sindhi> newsgroup, is supported by *both* Muslim
Sindhis and Hindu Sindhis throught out the world. This is what
WE Sindhis around the world said we wanted. Therefore this
is not a Indo-Pak thing... Check the "Yes" Voting results..
The division is between Sindhis who want a Newsgroup and those
individual who want to deny it to them.
I am dissapointed to discover that some people felt it was to neccessay
campaign against this newsgroup. So far, 50 out of the 197 "No" votes
have found to be illegal, these votes came from sites which provide no
newsgroup access. According to the rules, people who don't have access
to newsgroup, cannot participate in the vote.
I feel that these illegal voters, were ill-informed about the nature
of this newsgroup and must have jumped on what thinking it to be a
Indo-Pak thing.
Without these "50" illegal No Votes, <soc.culture.sindhi> would have
passed, without problems.
Rajesh Kirpalani
Proponent : soc.culture.sindhi
Vivek Sadananda Pai
In article <slrn44ted5a...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>,
Jay Maynard <jmay...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu> wrote:
>On 1 Jul 1996 01:48:52 GMT, Eric Jaron Stieglitz <eph...@atlantis.ctr.columbia.edu> wrote:
>>massive vote solicitation at the site paknet1.ptc.pk.
>
Come on, Jay, you can do better than that. After all, didn't you issue
some sort of call to have Tale do something or another after the SCK
vote?
Surely you can issue some similarly indignant proclamation now that
the Sindhis have seem a vote campaign to squash their group, or is it
just a little too ironic to watch the Pakistani forces squash a group
when you've just been proclaiming how they were the victims in another
vote?
It's been almost a week already, and if you don't act soon, I'll have
to bring out the Sally Strothers Voice (tm), and you surely don't want
to submit the news.groups regulars to that, do you? I'm not asking for
much - just a similarly self-righteous call to action with the same
sort of hand-wringing you had in the denunciation of the SCK results.
-Vivek
Jay Maynard
On 1 Jul 1996 17:27:21 GMT, Vivek Sadananda Pai <vi...@cs.rice.edu> wrote:
>In article <slrn44ted5a...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>,
>Jay Maynard <jmay...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu> wrote:
>>Why bother? After scijk, massive vote solicitation is clearly acceptable.
>Come on, Jay, you can do better than that.
I was feeling pretty depressed when I wrote that.
>Surely you can issue some similarly indignant proclamation now that
>the Sindhis have seem a vote campaign to squash their group, or is it
>just a little too ironic to watch the Pakistani forces squash a group
>when you've just been proclaiming how they were the victims in another
>vote?
Okkay, fine.
I hereby call on Dave Lawrence to set aside the vote on scs and create
the group anyway. As with the similar defeat of sck, it was caused by
political campaigning having little to do with the actual desirability
of the group.
There. Happy?
FWIW, I expect this call to be ignored, just as the call to do the Right
Thing with sck was ignored.
Turnabout is fair play: I expect you to fully support the defeat of the
group with the same nationalistic zeal as you did the defeat of sck.
Ameer Hassan - MME
So chill it.
Rajesh Keswani
Since the Sindhi Newsgroup was unfortunately defeated, i am hoping that
someone can privately e-mail me the address to get onto the Sindhi
newsgroup.
The voting proedure seems unnecessarily beuracratic. I don't understand
why it is not good enough to show that 348 people want a Sindhi newsgroup.
Why is it that because there are people opposed to the newsgroup, that
we can not have a forum to discuss our culture. Just because it is
controversial does not mean it is not important. It is odd how 100 people
who want to discuss birds from antarctica (for a hypothetical example) can
get their newsgroup, but not people who simply want to discuss their
culture, history, and heritage. There should be a point where the number
of yes votes supercedes the 2/3 majority needed.
Thanks,
(and please do send information about the mailing list)
Joe Bernstein
Newsgroups trimmed.
In article <4r0vbf$q...@larry.rice.edu>, vi...@cs.rice.edu (Vivek Sadananda
Pai) wrote:
>The only objection I had seen anyone raise on this issue is that
>the group should be named s.c.pakistan.sindh, rather than s.c.sindhi.
>Note that the former denotes a province of Pakistan, while the
>latter denotes a culture of a group of people who are geographically
>diverse, especially as a result of the diaspora caused by the
>Great Partition.
I saw two NO votes which I considered undoubtedly justified, besides the
usual ones from professional NO voters (which I consider less certainly
justified...). (By the way, one of the protests of NO votes mentioned
"Minister of Truth" not giving his real name. This came up only a few
weeks ago in the soc.culture.kashmir results argument, if I recall right.
Jan Isley has stated that he's willing to accept "Minister of Truth" for
this guy. Please drop that name from your protest...)
Christopher Stone's NO vote, I took to be on the grounds that the group
was unmoderated, and he thought that was a bad idea. He is well known as
a supporter of moderated newsgroups in general and of moderated
soc.culture.* newsgroups in particular. He spoke up in the scs debate and
was ignored. He has posted to this effect in this thread. While I wasn't
persuaded by him then (now I'm not so sure), I think he has every right to
vote NO on the basis of his established views.
Sohail Qureshi's NO vote, I took to be on the grounds that the proponents
refused to supply numbers concerning mailing list traffic which they had
cited to justify the group's creation. Mr. Qureshi is established as a
news.groups regular who routinely seeks traffic numbers, and in my opinion
he has every right to vote NO when refused this information. Indeed, I
was tempted to vote NO myself, because he was insulted when he asked, as
if he were asking solely out of Pakistani bigotry. However, since I don't
actually consider traffic forecasts a good reason for NO or YES votes, I
abstained instead. What I'm trying to say is that Mr. Qureshi has an
established record of posts which show an interest in traffic numbers, and
I'm quite prepared to believe that he voted on this *non-political* basis.
I was reasonably confident that the majority of other NO votes, as well as
lots of the YES votes, were political in character. Mr. Stone was the
only person who advocated moderation during the debate, and there weren't
many asking for traffic numbers either.
>Will the news.groups regulars make a big fuss about this one, or
>do the Sindhis not warrant any particular anguish?
Hum. Here, I'm sure, you're referring to various calls for results to be
overturned thanks to political voting.
Since I have a history with this issue, I won't duck, but let me boringly
review that history.
When the "sampled" soc.culture.indian.jammu-kashmir result was announced,
there were lots of calls for it to be overturned. I agreed with these
calls -- in point of fact, I thought the whole vote should be invalidated,
but I also thought a "sampled" result improper. This had nothing to do
with the topic of political voting specifically, rather with the known
extent of vote solicitation (=fraud) affecting both sides of that vote
(why I thought the vote should be invalidated) and with the improper
precedent being set (why I thought the result should be trashed).
I did *not* support any call for the final scij-k result, based on that
tainted vote, to be overturned. (This, I believe, is where I parted ways
with Jay Maynard, who is prominently associated with such calls.) I
considered tale's explanation in the result message acceptable, and wrote
the thing off as just another bad result of a flawed process. (Like the
non-existence of soc.culture.macedonia, soc.culture.tibet,
soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya...)
In the case of rec.music.white-power, where a very few people, among them
Mr. Maynard, made similar calls, there were so few YES votes that it was
reasonable to believe non-political NO votes, for which there were
abundant reasons, would have defeated the group without any political NO
votes. Therefore I didn't support him in that case either.
In the case of soc.culture.kashmir, I believed again that there was plenty
of reason for NO voting. In fact, I posted an exhaustive demonstration of
this point, a few days before the end of the voting period, precisely to
establish this before the inevitable cries that the NO voters had no
reason for their objections. Although I'm pretty sure most of my fellow
NO voters were (again) inspired by politics, I really see no reason
proponents as un-forthcoming as the sck one (let alone the rmw-p one!)
should be rewarded with newsgroups just because assholes campaign against
them.
In the case of soc.religion.messianic/talk.religion.messiah, enough
concerns had been raised about the former's moderation panel that I could
see a point to NO votes, though I personally didn't think those concerns
justified. I saw *no* justification for the NO votes on
talk.religion.messiah, particularly given the proponent's rather
astonishing willingness to compromise in the newsgroup's creation, except
where the usual professional NO voters were concerned. However, there
were fewer than 100 YES votes, and anyone who called for a newgroup on
that basis would look like an imbecile.
In principle, I could still see my way to supporting a call to overturn a
result on the basis of political voting. But the reasons tale gave in the
scij-k final result posting remain cogent. I still have yet to see a good
way to protect Usenet votes from this problem, and I *certainly* haven't
found one myself. (For all the *other* benefits the numbered ballot
scheme brings...) So in practice, I'm really not sure what it would take
for me to support one of Mr. Maynard's calls. Probably a result like
talk.religion.messiah's, but with more YES votes. Because of the concerns
mentioned above vis-a-vis Messrs Qureshi and Stone, the soc.culture.sindhi
result does *not* strike me as that clear-cut.
In this particular case, the complaint about NO votes from one site in the
*.pk domain seems more plausible, and I look forward to Mr. Isley's answer
to that complaint.
Finally, the most plausible answer I personally have found to political
voting is that, in future, I'll be doing it myself. I expect to make it
my business to vote on well-crafted proposals where I'm aware of a
political voting issue, in opposition to what I perceive to be the main
thrust of such political voting. In other words, if I had the above votes
to do over again, I'd vote YES on scs and trm, probably also srm. (Since
scij-k, rmw-p, and sck weren't well-crafted, I wouldn't apply this rule to
them.) In future, I'm going to be casting political votes against the
practice of political voting. (Oh, I do hope Shrisha Rao is reading this,
that sentence seems tailor-made for his sort of careful parsing and
shredding... :-)
Joe Bernstein
PS - In another thread, I've seen some fairly reputable people confirm
that Jan Isley has lost net access at the site where he had been
conducting something like 2/3rds of Usenet votes in recent months. I'm
surprised nobody in *this* thread has yet thanked him for this work in
general, and as it applies to soc.culture.sindhi in particular. I think
Usenet stands to lose a lot if Jan Isley is no longer able to serve with
the UVV, even though that organisation seems once again to have other
members.
Well. Thank you, Mr. Isley. I hope this isn't, in fact, the last
occasion for such thanks to be due you.
--
Joe Bernstein, free-lance writer and bookstore worker
speaking for myself and nobody else j...@sfbooks.com
Vivek Sadananda Pai
In article <slrn4tg72o....@k5zc.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>,
Jay Maynard <jmay...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu> wrote:
>I hereby call on Dave Lawrence to set aside the vote on scs and create
>the group anyway. As with the similar defeat of sck, it was caused by
>political campaigning having little to do with the actual desirability
>of the group.
>
>There. Happy?
Ebullient.
>FWIW, I expect this call to be ignored, just as the call to do the Right
>Thing with sck was ignored.
The SCK defeat was the Menendez sympathy-case poster-child for the
newsgroup creation process - the sympathy you feel for their being
orphans is nothing in comparison to the fact that they had a role in
the matter.
>Turnabout is fair play: I expect you to fully support the defeat of the
>group with the same nationalistic zeal as you did the defeat of sck.
Ah, the Goebbels in you is popping up. Show me where I showed one iota
of nationalistic zeal regarding the defeat of SCK. It's been eons
since I said Jai Hind in a newsgroup posting. Can anyone predict when
it'll happen again?
However, to make it explicit, I'm glad that _this_ incarnation of the
SCK proposal went down in defeat, because I have no reason at all to
trust either of the moderators. I hope that a future SCK proposal
finds a balanced moderation panel, and I'll gladly support it.
-Vivek
Jay Maynard
On 2 Jul 1996 05:55:46 GMT, Vivek Sadananda Pai <vi...@cs.rice.edu> wrote:
>Ah, the Goebbels in you is popping up.
(Does this count as an invocation of Godwin's Law?)
>However, to make it explicit, I'm glad that _this_ incarnation of the
>SCK proposal went down in defeat, because I have no reason at all to
>trust either of the moderators. I hope that a future SCK proposal
>finds a balanced moderation panel, and I'll gladly support it.
...in other words, you're not happy with one newsgroup where the Indian
viewpoint on Kashmir may be presented - you want two, while the Kashmiris
don't get an equivalent to scijk. Hrmph. How greedy of you.
Jay Maynard
On Tue, 02 Jul 1996 01:11:26 -0600, Joe Bernstein <j...@sfbooks.com> wrote:
>I considered tale's explanation in the result message acceptable, and wrote
>the thing off as just another bad result of a flawed process. (Like the
>non-existence of soc.culture.macedonia, soc.culture.tibet,
>soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya...)
At what point do we stop accepting bad results that keep people from having
groups where they feel comfortable in expressing their views? At what point
do we start recognizing that the process needs to accommodate the minority
viewpoint? At what point do we stand up for free expression?
>In future, I'm going to be casting political votes against the
>practice of political voting.
I've been arguing this position for some time, but I've come to the belief
that it's ineffective: when nationalists can whip up a couple of thousand
votes against a proposal, let alone 30,000, a few folks voting this way
won't even make a ripple.
It's time to do more.
Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
With the foreword that I have alrady protested the PAKNET1 votes (on the
basis of the very high protion of ballots coming from a single site is a
serious voting irregularity), let me remark on one of the protests that
have little merit thus would've better been unsaid:
On 1 Jul 1996, rajesh kirpalani wrote:
> Examination of the Voting Results reveals that 50 of the 197 "No" Votes are
> suspicious and illegal.
The Usenet 'vote' is not a legal matter.
> These 50 votes came from Internet sites which provides NO NEWSGROUP ACCESS,
> only email.
Anyone with email does, in effect, have newsgroup access.
> According to the rules, people are not allowed to vote if they
> don't have newsgroup access.
The rules don't say that, either.
> It appears that there has been significant campaining effort to make this
> newsgroup fail.
Yeah, well that happens to most newsgroups. Campaigning per se is no
basis for disqualification - in fact, it's quite natural for a "vote".
- --
Zoli fek...@bc.edu, keeper of <http://www.hix.com/hungarian-faq/>
*SELLERS BEWARE: I will never buy anything from companies associated
*with inappropriate online advertising (unsolicited commercial email,
*excessive multiposting etc), and discourage others from doing so too!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMdklicQ/4s87M5ohAQE7aQH/RjnmWYMDvKCTw14Vzd9P8GWWNhQHJrPe
hkya5Bq/p1Q5NaqiicsbLAKSNaALoq8KgwE81gNg7ikV1H7WOfmz3g==
=gxEk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Yousuf Jokhio
On Tue, 2 Jul 1996, Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq wrote:
> > These 50 votes came from Internet sites which provides NO NEWSGROUP ACCESS,
> > only email.
> Anyone with email does, in effect, have newsgroup access.
>
That's incorrect..... If you have email access, it doesn't mean that you
have a newsgroup excess too......... I have seen some sites which only
provide you with email access but not newsgroup or web access. Same is
the case with paknet1.ptc.pk domain. If you think that's right then why
hasn't any of the NO voter from .pk domain taken part in this discussion
so far...... Isn't it fishy!!!!
Regards,
Yousuf Jokhio
Christopher B. Stone
>These 50 votes came from Internet sites which provides NO NEWSGROUP ACCESS,
>only email. According to the rules, people are not allowed to vote if they
>don't have newsgroup access.
I'm not aware of this rule being codified anywhere. You certainly can
argue that it's against the spirit of the rules, of course, but I don't
see it as being grounds to invalidate the vote.
Somewhere
>
> "paknet" does not provide Newsgroup access, only e-mail. 37 Votes.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And how do you know that ?. Do you subscribe to PTC ?. Huhn , Here is one
example of PTC user posting to SCP . Now before you go and make false
claims do some search , search engines never fail
Example begins------
Path:
plnews.pl.unisys.com!eanews1!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ycc.yale.edu!yale!news-mail-gateway!daemon
From:
Rehan Haque <reh...@paknet1.ptc.pk>
Newsgroups:
soc.culture.pakistan
Subject:
Private Confessions of an ADDICT
Date:
21 Jun 1996 05:45:17 -0400
Organization:
Yale CS Mail/News Gateway
Lines:
15
Sender:
dae...@cs.yale.edu
Message-ID:
<199606210545...@babyblue.cs.yale.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host:
babyblue.cs.yale.edu
Yaar, you people fight toooooooo much. It wasn't this bad when I left.
Not to say that I don't enjoy this, but still...
the most pleasant surprise is that some of you have actually gotten
better
at your English. So, I guess you are learning SOMEthing in those
schools... which is good.
Anyway, this is just a trial to see if I can actually post on scp.
Take care.
Rehan Haque
----------------------------------------
> Rajesh Kirpalani
> Proponent : soc.culture.sindhi
Uday Reddy
Ameer Hassan - MME wrote:
>
> There were a lot more `illegal Votes' from `wanis', `tanis' and `pAnis'.
> So chill it.
Random allegation. What basis do you have to say they were "illegal
votes"?
Uday Reddy
Eric Jaron Stieglitz
1) Use your real name next time.
2) If you look carefully at the message, you'll see that it came through
a Yale mail-to-news Gateway. That doesn't prove that PTC has newsgroup
access, even though some individual people may have it. Oh, and the
guy below didn't vote.
In article <31D992...@here.com>, Somewhere <not...@here.com> wrote:
>>
>> "paknet" does not provide Newsgroup access, only e-mail. 37 Votes.
>
>And how do you know that ?. Do you subscribe to PTC ?. Huhn , Here is one
>example of PTC user posting to SCP . Now before you go and make false
>claims do some search , search engines never fail
>
>Path: plnews.pl.unisys.com!eanews1!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ycc.yale.edu!yale!news-mail-gateway!daemon
> From: Rehan Haque <reh...@paknet1.ptc.pk>
> Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
> Subject: Private Confessions of an ADDICT
> Date: 21 Jun 1996 05:45:17 -0400
> Organization: Yale CS Mail/News Gateway
> Lines: 15
> Sender: dae...@cs.yale.edu
> Message-ID: <199606210545...@babyblue.cs.yale.edu>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: babyblue.cs.yale.edu
Bruce Baugh
>At what point do we stop accepting bad results that keep people from having
>groups where they feel comfortable in expressing their views? At what point
>do we start recognizing that the process needs to accommodate the minority
>viewpoint? At what point do we stand up for free expression?
Good question. It seems to me that there is a Real Problem here, and I
frankly don't have a clue how to separate the purely prejudical "I don't
think people should have a forum to talk about this" reaction from the
more thoughtful "this has rotten namespace/charter/no demonstrable
traffic/etc".
Bruce Baugh <*> br...@aracnet.com <*> http://www.aracnet.com/~bruce
See my Web pages for
New science fiction by Steve Stirling and George Alec Effing er
Christlib, the mailing list for Christian and libertarian concerns
Daedalus Games, makers of Shadowfist and Feng Shui
Yousuf Jokhio
This clearly shows that the ptc.pk domain doesn't have any newsgroup
access... If .pk domain had any newsgroup access, they wouldn't have
needed some "Mr Somewhere" to repost their message on this newsgroup...
On Tue, 2 Jul 1996, Somewhere wrote:
> >
> > "paknet" does not provide Newsgroup access, only e-mail. 37 Votes.
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> And how do you know that ?. Do you subscribe to PTC ?. Huhn , Here is one
> example of PTC user posting to SCP . Now before you go and make false
> claims do some search , search engines never fail
>
>
> Example begins------
>
>
> Path:
>
> plnews.pl.unisys.com!eanews1!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ycc.yale.edu!yale!news-mail-gateway!daemon
> From:
> Rehan Haque <reh...@paknet1.ptc.pk>
> Newsgroups:
> soc.culture.pakistan
> Subject:
> Private Confessions of an ADDICT
> Date:
> 21 Jun 1996 05:45:17 -0400
> Organization:
> Yale CS Mail/News Gateway
> Lines:
> 15
> Sender:
> dae...@cs.yale.edu
> Message-ID:
> <199606210545...@babyblue.cs.yale.edu>
> NNTP-Posting-Host:
> babyblue.cs.yale.edu
>
>
>
Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tue, 2 Jul 1996, Yousuf Jokhio wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Jul 1996, Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq wrote:
> > Anyone with email does, in effect, have newsgroup access.
> >
> That's incorrect..... If you have email access, it doesn't mean that you
> have a newsgroup excess too.........
It does too. There are several gateways one can use to receive news with
email-only access - see eg. the 'banned-newsgroups' FAQ or the 'Internet
via email' FAQ for further details.
The host in question is also on the Internet (as opposed to being
email-only), which means there are many other way for its users to access
news as well - NNTP, telnet and so on (assuming that they don't yet have
news locally, which you don't know for sure either - and in any case they
can get it any day they go into the trouble of setting it up).
Which does not mean that such a massive effect by a single site should
be allowed to influence the vote this decisively, IMHO. But the rationale
you're trying to make is a non-reason.
- --
Zoli fek...@bc.edu, keeper of <http://www.hix.com/hungarian-faq/>
*SELLERS BEWARE: I will never buy anything from companies associated
*with inappropriate online advertising (unsolicited commercial email,
*excessive multiposting etc), and discourage others from doing so too!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMdrEBsQ/4s87M5ohAQFqAQIAtH8Kw/l0iAvuLW29QwC14BgZLAAuCgvC
r4ZE9p0ZJe0KkgnZF8WEdGGaUxbNn8G1aVd6EaCFlEtiJwbuerdQHQ==
=1t7L
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 2 Jul 1996, Christopher B. Stone wrote:
> In article <4r8lfh$a...@bcrkh13.bnr.ca> raj...@bnsgh719.bnr.co.uk (rajesh kirpalani) writes:
> >These 50 votes came from Internet sites which provides NO NEWSGROUP ACCESS,
> >only email. According to the rules, people are not allowed to vote if they
> >don't have newsgroup access.
>
> I'm not aware of this rule being codified anywhere.
It is not.
> You certainly can argue that it's against the spirit of the rules
But then I can - as I have - argue that it is not against the spirit of
the rules at all. The spirit is to poll those people who'd be interested
in reading the group, or otherwise have an interest for it to be created,
or think that it'd be bad for them or for Usenet (which is them potential
users, in this context).
In any case, there practically isn't such thing as people who can't have
newsgroup access anymore.
I do think that the massive paknet voting block should be disqualified,
and a revote be called. But people lining up all the wrong reasons for
this do a disservice to their cause.
- --
Zoli fek...@bc.edu, keeper of <http://www.hix.com/hungarian-faq/>
*SELLERS BEWARE: I will never buy anything from companies associated
*with inappropriate online advertising (unsolicited commercial email,
*excessive multiposting etc), and discourage others from doing so too!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMdsAm8Q/4s87M5ohAQFURAIA2iHwGKxxYokjc6Z3u8nxtgPLIpUh3JCO
W19J4Vz067MquO/3qlYy9bZr9obEAWI9Fw4yQpGI3/eXGdQE3vrQtg==
=zj/y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Robert Ames
In article <4re4g7$1a8...@mycroft.kenosis.com>,
br...@kenosis.com (Bruce Baugh) wrote:
>In article <slrn44thukd....@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>, jmay...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu wrote:
>
>>At what point do we stop accepting bad results that keep people from having
>>groups where they feel comfortable in expressing their views? At what point
>>do we start recognizing that the process needs to accommodate the minority
>>viewpoint? At what point do we stand up for free expression?
>
>Good question. It seems to me that there is a Real Problem here, and I
What is required is that the minority performs its own newgroup and
enforces it. For example, by getting a restraining order against UUNET
to prevent it from sending out an rmgroup message.
Steve Bonine
Robert Ames (am...@ican.net) wrote:
:
: What is required is that the minority performs its own newgroup and
: enforces it. For example, by getting a restraining order against UUNET
: to prevent it from sending out an rmgroup message.
You really don't have a clue, do you?
To my knowledge, the only rmgroups sent by tale are to counteract
forged newgroup messages. He does this as a service to Usenet,
specifically as a service to administrators of news sites. It is
appreciated.
The issue is not rmgroups, but the group CREATION messages. You can
injunct all you want, but you cannot create the credibility that tale has
earned with all the hard work that he has done to contribute to Usenet.
News administrators pay attention to his control messages not because some
lawyer played games, but because he has earned their respect.
Jay Maynard
On Thu, 04 Jul 1996 00:32:17 -0400, Robert Ames <am...@ican.net> wrote:
>What is required is that the minority performs its own newgroup and
>enforces it. For example, by getting a restraining order against UUNET
>to prevent it from sending out an rmgroup message.
Boy, there's a canonical kook answer if I ever saw one. If I hadn't gone
back to the header to look, I'd have sworn it came from Boursy.
Free clue: Dave Lawrence issues newgroups and rmgroups for himself, anot in
any way as a representative of UUNET.
Bruce Baugh
>What is required is that the minority performs its own newgroup and
>enforces it. For example, by getting a restraining order against UUNET
>to prevent it from sending out an rmgroup message.
Alt already exists. If I wanted untrammeled chaos, I know where to find
it, and so should you. Implicit in my concern - now explicit - is that I
think a system for establishing trustworthy newgroup and rmgroup
messages, like the one the Big 8 has, is highly desirable. I have yet to
read an attack upon the fundamental principle that didn't boil down to
immature pique at not being allowed to do as one wishes without regard
for consequences, and you're not changing that.
Bruce Baugh <*> br...@aracnet.com <*> http://www.aracnet.com/~bruce
See my Web pages for
New science fiction by Steve Stirling and George Alec Effing er
Christlib, the mailing list for Christian and libertarian concerns
Daedalus Games, makers of Shadowfist and Feng Shui
Unsolicited commercial e-mail will be proofread at $50/hour, min $100.
Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
In article <slrn44thukd....@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>,
jmay...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) wrote:
>On Tue, 02 Jul 1996 01:11:26 -0600, Joe Bernstein <j...@sfbooks.com> wrote:
>>the thing off as just another bad result of a flawed process. (Like the
>>non-existence of soc.culture.macedonia, soc.culture.tibet,
>>soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya...)
>
>groups where they feel comfortable in expressing their views? At what point
>do we start recognizing that the process needs to accommodate the minority
>viewpoint? At what point do we stand up for free expression?
>
>>practice of political voting.
>
>that it's ineffective: when nationalists can whip up a couple of thousand
>votes against a proposal, let alone 30,000, a few folks voting this way
>won't even make a ripple.
>
>It's time to do more.
Dr. Grubor has suggested amending the voting rules retroactively as follows:
"If more than 300 valid YES votes are counted, the newsgroup is created
irrespective of the number of NO votes. NO votes are only effective if
fewer than 300 YES votes are counted."
I second Dr. Grubor's proposal. The man is brilliant!
Thank you, Dr. Grubor, for creating the Internet and guiding its development.
Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 3 Jul 1996, Eric Jaron Stieglitz wrote:
> 2) If you look carefully at the message, you'll see that it came through
> a Yale mail-to-news Gateway. That doesn't prove that PTC has newsgroup
> access, even though some individual people may have it.
It does prove that every individual with email has got write access to
news as well. A number of other gateways provide read access, too.
It also proves that at least one paknet user has been posting to Usenet -
contrary to what was claimed by some protesters.
- --
Zoli fek...@bc.edu, keeper of <http://www.hix.com/hungarian-faq/>
*SELLERS BEWARE: I will never buy anything from companies associated
*with inappropriate online advertising (unsolicited commercial email,
*excessive multiposting etc), and discourage others from doing so too!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMdw/YMQ/4s87M5ohAQFLkQH9FJ1jEByIYnkkGgGA1aHy4H1vVU9xBBJD
yYfIFZ3GB6E4AlSjbIMBGNvuZZQGpJSvvuE5BdG9nu661Sf65MqviA==
=6/T0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Wed, 3 Jul 1996, Bruce Baugh wrote:
> In article <slrn44thukd....@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>, jmay...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu wrote:
>
> >At what point do we stop accepting bad results that keep people from having
> >groups where they feel comfortable in expressing their views? At what point
> >do we start recognizing that the process needs to accommodate the minority
> >viewpoint? At what point do we stand up for free expression?
>
> Good question. It seems to me that there is a Real Problem here, and I
> frankly don't have a clue how to separate the purely prejudical "I don't
> think people should have a forum to talk about this" reaction from the
> more thoughtful "this has rotten namespace/charter/no demonstrable
> traffic/etc".
There's no real way to separate them (short of applying advanced
mind-reading ;-(). So we've got to settle with what we have: getting a
mainstream (ie. 'Big 7+1') Usenet group has been a matter of achieving
some level of consensus on its creation. When such is not reached the
group fails - which may be unfortunate, in the case of prejudical
opposition, or fortunate in the case of counter-reasons mindful of Usenet.
Trying to judge acceptability of ballots based on what is thought about
what's in some voters' mind is an excercise in futility.
- --
Zoli fek...@bc.edu, keeper of <http://www.hix.com/hungarian-faq/>
*SELLERS BEWARE: I will never buy anything from companies associated
*with inappropriate online advertising (unsolicited commercial email,
*excessive multiposting etc), and discourage others from doing so too!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMdxgnsQ/4s87M5ohAQFFCAIAjkL1nHyBuATD2e2+aVPqreyEziNSwvLc
VUhlMUGDq1N/Npaf9ZFRSYZrPqVblkb9qLJPAMSpT6YCzzU0qFCn6Q==
=A8gl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Russ Allbery
Steve Bonine <bon...@tezcat.com> writes:
> To my knowledge, the only rmgroups sent by tale are to counteract forged
> newgroup messages. He does this as a service to Usenet, specifically as
> a service to administrators of news sites. It is appreciated.
Tale issues rmgroups for every newgroup in the Big Eight which was not
the result of the regular RFD/CFV process. Of course, there is no reason
why any site has to honor Tale's rmgroups any more than they have to honor
his newgroups.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@cs.stanford.edu) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Jay Maynard
On Thu, 4 Jul 1996 20:24:04 -0400, "Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq" <fek...@chi3.bc.edu> wrote:
>So we've got to settle with what we have: getting a
>mainstream (ie. 'Big 7+1') Usenet group has been a matter of achieving
>some level of consensus on its creation. When such is not reached the
>group fails - which may be unfortunate, in the case of prejudical
>opposition, or fortunate in the case of counter-reasons mindful of Usenet.
I don't think we've actually _HAD_ any votes fail because of counter-reasons
mindful of Usenet. I know we've threatened and complained until we're
cyanotic about bad proposals, but they seem to keep passing anyway. We only
have votes with sufficient interest to pass fail because of prejudicial
opposition, and those failures have become more and more overwhelming.
> Trying to judge acceptability of ballots based on what is thought about
>what's in some voters' mind is an excercise in futility.
I believe that most NO voters these days do so precisely because of
political reasons. The number of people clueful about Usenet who actually
vote NO on a bad proposal is seldom over 100.
Bruce Baugh
>Thank you, Dr. Grubor, for creating the Internet and guiding its development.
The part I wonder about is whether Vulis actually _believes_ stuff like
this, or simply finds it entertaining in a trolling sort of way.
Robert Ames
In article <4rguv6$2j0...@mycroft.kenosis.com>,
br...@kenosis.com (Bruce Baugh) wrote:
>Implicit in my concern - now explicit - is that I
>think a system for establishing trustworthy newgroup and rmgroup
>messages, like the one the Big 8 has, is highly desirable. I have yet to
>read an attack upon the fundamental principle that didn't boil down to
>immature pique at not being allowed to do as one wishes without regard
>for consequences, and you're not changing that.
George Herbert, with whom I usually disagree, wrote an article recently
in which he stated that an alternative authority might be a good idea,
or at least would be an idea which he would not immediately reject.
To favor a broadening of responsibility is not the same as wanting to
do away with any approval process. I simply am unhappy with the present
"tyranny of the majority" which rewards intolerance with control.
Robert Ames
In article <4rgkmi$4...@tepe.tezcat.com>, bon...@tezcat.com (Steve Bonine) wrote:
>Robert Ames (am...@ican.net) wrote:
>:
>: What is required is that the minority performs its own newgroup and
>: enforces it. For example, by getting a restraining order against UUNET
>: to prevent it from sending out an rmgroup message.
>You really don't have a clue, do you?
>
>forged newgroup messages.
I believe you've been corrected on this. Must be embarrassing.
If tale restricted his rmgroups to forged messages, as you suggest, I
would have no objection at all.
Robert Ames
In article <slrn44tnrol....@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>,
jmay...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) wrote:
>Free clue: Dave Lawrence issues newgroups and rmgroups for himself, anot in
>any way as a representative of UUNET.
The evidence does not support your assertion. I just ftp'ed a few rmgroup
control messages from the archive at ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/control.
Here's when they were posted:
Fri Apr 5 09:20:31 1996 Fri Apr 5 11:12:39 1996
Fri Apr 12 11:15:31 1996 Fri Aug 19 19:40:03 1994
Fri Aug 26 19:49:51 1994 Mon Apr 8 10:42:10 1996
Mon Apr 15 10:36:04 1996 Mon Jul 10 14:02:02 1995
Mon Jul 17 13:52:06 1995 Mon May 6 15:47:21 1996
Mon May 6 15:57:50 1996 Mon May 13 16:10:06 1996
Mon Sep 19 19:46:16 1994 Sat May 4 10:36:17 1996
Sun May 5 11:16:39 1996 Thu Apr 4 10:37:37 1996
Thu Apr 11 10:35:59 1996 Thu Aug 10 10:36:21 1995
Thu Jun 6 15:55:36 1996 Thu Jun 6 16:15:32 1996
Thu Mar 14 14:54:43 1996 Thu Mar 28 10:23:35 1996
Thu Mar 28 10:25:16 1996 Tue Nov 10 13:09:42 1992
Wed May 8 10:40:40 1996 Wed May 15 13:05:44 1996
Wed Nov 22 11:55:07 1995 Wed Nov 22 11:55:07 1995
No messages were posted on weekends, and all but two were posted
during working hours. It certainly looks like this is part of his
job description.
Jay Maynard
On Thu, 04 Jul 1996 22:02:47 -0400, Robert Ames <am...@ican.net> wrote:
>In article <slrn44tnrol....@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>,
>jmay...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) wrote:
>>Free clue: Dave Lawrence issues newgroups and rmgroups for himself, anot in
>>any way as a representative of UUNET.
>The evidence does not support your assertion. I just ftp'ed a few rmgroup
>control messages from the archive at ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/control.
>Here's when they were posted:
[...]
>No messages were posted on weekends, and all but two were posted
>during working hours. It certainly looks like this is part of his
>job description.
You obviously don't understand "supported by" as opposed to "as a
representative of". UUNET is nice enough to allow him to perform his duties
as news.announce.newgroups moderator on their equipment, on their time, as
long as it does not interfere with his job. It is emphatically NOT part of
his job description, and if the two conflict, his job takes precedence. He
does not represent UUNET in any shape or fashion as moderator of
news.announce.newgroups.
Joe Bernstein
In article <slrn44tojio....@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>,
jmay...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu wrote:
>On Thu, 4 Jul 1996 20:24:04 -0400, "Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq"
<fek...@chi3.bc.edu> wrote:
>>So we've got to settle with what we have: getting a
>>mainstream (ie. 'Big 7+1') Usenet group has been a matter of achieving
>>some level of consensus on its creation. When such is not reached the
>>group fails - which may be unfortunate, in the case of prejudical
>>opposition, or fortunate in the case of counter-reasons mindful of Usenet.
>
>I don't think we've actually _HAD_ any votes fail because of counter-reasons
>mindful of Usenet. I know we've threatened and complained until we're
>cyanotic about bad proposals, but they seem to keep passing anyway. We only
>have votes with sufficient interest to pass fail because of prejudicial
>opposition, and those failures have become more and more overwhelming.
Nice try, but wrong.
rec.arts.sf.dune
Opposition based largely on namespace (the level after rec.arts.sf.* needs
to be broader-interest). I didn't really agree but this is not
"prejudicial" opposition, it's the "good" technical kind.
Additional opposition incurred because the proponent committed to changing
the name but then did not follow through, also didn't tell anyone he
wouldn't follow through. If this is "prejudicial" opposition then we
might as well abandon the whole concept of an RFD; voting against a
proponent's acting in bad faith strikes me as perfectly proper and quite
objective.
Final vote result 146-48.
Moreover, I would put it to you that bad proposals very often are pushed
through to CFV only when people have non-Usenet purposes ("prejudicial", I
guess); and then it's not unreasonable to be grateful for
non-Usenet-related NO votes helping squash those proposals.
Oh, hell, the system's far from perfect. scij-k passes and sc.sindhi
fails. That stupid ultima-dragons group passes, for crying out loud. As
I understand it, some imbecilic attempt to make us.* part of the Big 8
backfires so now nobody even carries that hierarchy, and as a result we
end up with monstrosities like rec.scouting.usa. There's every
possibility that no-one will volunteer to take votes the next time a
controversial proposal re Nazis or South Asia comes forward. All I'm
saying is, occasionally bad proposals *do* get defeated, to make up for
all the bad ones that pass, and I'm tired of hearing that every defeat
across the board is an example of villainous cruelty on tale's part.
I think Jim Riley's proposal for what amounts to a two-stage system is
headed in the right direction. I might even be willing to accept a much
more dictatorial version of such a system, in which (for example)
group-advice's decisions were final and the whole question of NO votes was
therefore obviated.
In the meantime, though, I don't see how much purpose there really is in
repeatedly demanding of tale, post facto, a change for which there's no
precedent. It might be more helpful, Mr. Maynard, if you'd lay out in
detail just what standards you expect him to follow. Are you behind the
proposal (John Grubor's, I gather) to newgroup anything that gets enough
YES votes? It's not necessarily a bad idea just because it's his, but it
would help if you were explicit. I guess there isn't much detail involved
in saying "The rules should be changed; add a new rule that says 300 YES
votes guarantees newgrouping". But at least if you'd post that in one of
these "new ballot scheme" threads, those of us who can't stand to read the
Gruboursy threads would maybe start considering it.
As it is, while I'm not all that often in agreement with Vivek Pai, I have
to agree with his characterisation of you as "ever-exasperated", and
wonder what purpose of yours or anyone's is served by the resulting
jeremiads.
Joe Bernstein
--
Joe Bernstein, free-lance writer and bookstore worker
speaking for myself and nobody else j...@sfbooks.com
boursy
In article <uPXJqD...@bwalk.dm.com>,
Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM <d...@bwalk.dm.com> wrote:
>In article <slrn44thukd....@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>,
>jmay...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) wrote:
>>On Tue, 02 Jul 1996 01:11:26 -0600, Joe Bernstein <j...@sfbooks.com> wrote:
>>>I considered tale's explanation in the result message acceptable, and wrote
>>>the thing off as just another bad result of a flawed process. (Like the
>>>non-existence of soc.culture.macedonia, soc.culture.tibet,
>>>soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya...)
>>
>>groups where they feel comfortable in expressing their views? At what point
>>do we start recognizing that the process needs to accommodate the minority
>>viewpoint? At what point do we stand up for free expression?
>>
>>>practice of political voting.
>>
>>I've been arguing this position for some time, but I've come to the belief
>>that it's ineffective: when nationalists can whip up a couple of thousand
>>votes against a proposal, let alone 30,000, a few folks voting this way
>>won't even make a ripple.
>>
>>It's time to do more.
>
>Dr. Grubor has suggested amending the voting rules retroactively as follows:
>
> "If more than 300 valid YES votes are counted, the newsgroup is created
> irrespective of the number of NO votes. NO votes are only effective if
> fewer than 300 YES votes are counted."
>
>I second Dr. Grubor's proposal. The man is brilliant!
>
He is indeed and his suggestion has been adopted and made
official.
>Thank you, Dr. Grubor, for creating the Internet and guiding its development.
Yes Dr. Grubor. Thank you.
Steve
news.admin.censorship
boursy
Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Thu, 4 Jul 1996, Robert Ames wrote:
> What is required is that the minority performs its own newgroup and
> enforces it. For example, by getting a restraining order against UUNET
> to prevent it from sending out an rmgroup message.
Robert,
I had been wondering when you started out as a clone for the early Boursy
how long it's going to take to turn into a full-blown gruboursy. I must
congratulate you now - you got there in record time ;-(!
- --
Zoli fek...@bc.edu, keeper of <http://www.hix.com/hungarian-faq/>
*SELLERS BEWARE: I will never buy anything from companies associated
*with inappropriate online advertising (unsolicited commercial email,
*excessive multiposting etc), and discourage others from doing so too!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMd2C18Q/4s87M5ohAQFMVAH+IP+KmFvRgLOPAt3Tk4QQCnqKrQ4fWSMV
0Bl5UV5GMmbuzKIeuBz4hG/2ya7grplblnm9Z8e2HXPrsUmgOA9OUg==
=qDI5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 30 Jun 1996, Nadeem Jamali wrote:
> So why is that worse when the Pakistanis do similarly as the Indians do?
> Is it because the former is a smaller community than the latter;-(?
>
> Because, unlike the Kashmir newsgroups, there is no polititical
> statement in soc.culture.sindhi.
Says you. It is a political statement, unlike s.c.k., say they.
> It was proposed as a group for
> discussing the cultural heritage of the Sindhi diaspora. There are
> Sindhis in Pakistan, and there are Sindhis in India, and there are
> Sindhis settled all over the world, who call Hong Kong, Taiwan, UK, US
> their permanent homes.
Same for the kashmiris, isn't it?
> More importantly, as I have pointed out earlier, more than 50 votes
> against the newsgroup have been by people in the .pk domain. Everyone
> is welcome to scan soc.culture.pakistan to find any postings from the
> .pk domain. The other day, I searched the last 2000 articles, and
> didn't find a single one from a site in the .pk domain. Looks like
> these people don't even have access to the usenet.
Or they don't like to post. Or when they do they post thru other domains.
In any case having access (the lack of which you can't prove) to Usenet
has never been a requirement for accepting votes.
> I should also add that many of the NO votes are apparently a result of
> illegal canvassing. Almost all are based on nationalistic prejudices
I don't remember you protesting the many thousands of inappropriately
(note that "illegal" is an incorrect word here) canvassed Indian votes
just recently. So we're back to the main question: what is the difference,
besides the obvious one of Pakistanis having smaller numbers than Indians?
- --
Zoli fek...@bc.edu, keeper of <http://www.hix.com/hungarian-faq/>
*SELLERS BEWARE: I will never buy anything from companies associated
*with inappropriate online advertising (unsolicited commercial email,
*excessive multiposting etc), and discourage others from doing so too!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMd2n0sQ/4s87M5ohAQHJPAH+IkwyK0US88K5DLaBJegFKxaPytiKeMLa
2naqbSgldJMSrF43qEabi0YSCyXIBrabHFtFQoHfJNtzxtXzS5g94Q==
=J9QE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Nadeem Jamali
In article <Pine.SGI.3.91.960701...@chi3.bc.edu> "Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq" <fek...@chi3.bc.edu> writes:
On 30 Jun 1996, Nadeem Jamali wrote:
> So why is that worse when the Pakistanis do similarly as the Indians do?
> Is it because the former is a smaller community than the latter;-(?
>
> Because, unlike the Kashmir newsgroups, there is no polititical
> statement in soc.culture.sindhi.
Says you. It is a political statement, unlike s.c.k., say they.
Say who? What political statement is it making, can someone please
enlighten? The newsgroup is meant for the Sindhi diaspora, spread
all over the world. What name other than soc.culture.sindhi will be
suitable?
About Kashmir, it is common knowledge that Pakistan and India have
faught three wars in the last 50 years for Kashmir. India says it's a
part of India; Pakistan disputes that. The name soc.culture.kashmir
would support Pakistan's contention; the name
soc.culture.indian.jammu-kashmir (or another name under the
soc.culture.indian hierarchy) supports the Indian stance.
Sindh, on the other hand, is recognized by the entire world as a part
of Pakistan. The newsgroup name is not soc.culture.sindh, primarily to
avoid any confusion about this. It is soc.culture.sindhi, meant to
charter discussions about the culture and heritage of the Sindhi
diaspora. Sindhis from Pakistan, India and the rest of the world have
all supported the newsgroup. The only opponents are those Pakistanis
who are against Sindhis accross political/religious boundaries, having
a forum to discuss their shared culture.
> It was proposed as a group for
> discussing the cultural heritage of the Sindhi diaspora. There are
> Sindhis in Pakistan, and there are Sindhis in India, and there are
> Sindhis settled all over the world, who call Hong Kong, Taiwan, UK, US
> their permanent homes.
Same for the kashmiris, isn't it?
It may be, but it is irrelevant. A proposal for soc.culture.kashmiri
would have been much less controversial for both Pakistanis and
Indians. Similarly would an unmoderated group, rather than one
moderated by Indians or Pakistanis, or Kashmiris supporting either
side. Soc.culture.sindhi has been proposed as an unmoderated
newsgroup, just to avoid the controversy over who will control it.
> More importantly, as I have pointed out earlier, more than 50 votes
> against the newsgroup have been by people in the .pk domain. Everyone
> is welcome to scan soc.culture.pakistan to find any postings from the
> .pk domain. The other day, I searched the last 2000 articles, and
> didn't find a single one from a site in the .pk domain. Looks like
> these people don't even have access to the usenet.
Or they don't like to post. Or when they do they post thru other domains.
In any case having access (the lack of which you can't prove) to Usenet
has never been a requirement for accepting votes.
Here's something directly from the CFV:
``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 distribute
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 is generally considered to be vote fraud.
When in doubt, please ask the votetaker.''
Now if those people do not have Usenet access, how did they get to
see the CFV, except by someone's emailing it to them.
I realize it is hard to prove that they don't have access to Usenet,
but they definitely are less active members of the community. From the
thousands of messages posted on soc.culture.pakistan every week, only
one person seems to have *ever* posted there from a ptc.pk site. That
too through the Mail to News gateway at Yale. This particular person
has not even voted on soc.culture.sindhi. Why should people from one
practically inactive site be allowed to kill a proposal supported by
hundreds of Sindhis all over the world?
> I should also add that many of the NO votes are apparently a result of
> illegal canvassing. Almost all are based on nationalistic prejudices
I don't remember you protesting the many thousands of inappropriately
(note that "illegal" is an incorrect word here) canvassed Indian votes
just recently. So we're back to the main question: what is the difference,
besides the obvious one of Pakistanis having smaller numbers than Indians?
Please see earlier parts of this posting for how Kashmir newsgroups
mean things very different from a Sindhi newsgroup.
Nadeem
--
Nadeem Jamali jam...@cs.uiuc.edu
Department of Computer Science
University of Illinois-UC
Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 4 Jul 1996, Steve Bonine wrote:
> Robert Ames (am...@ican.net) wrote:
> : What is required is that the minority performs its own newgroup and
> : enforces it. For example, by getting a restraining order against UUNET
> : to prevent it from sending out an rmgroup message.
>
> You really don't have a clue, do you?
>
> To my knowledge, the only rmgroups sent by tale are to counteract
> forged newgroup messages. He does this as a service to Usenet,
> specifically as a service to administrators of news sites. It is
> appreciated.
But clearly, Ames meant forging newgroup messages - for "minority" here
means those who failed to win a vote according to the rules and thus don't
qualify for legitimate creation of the group by the n.a.n. moderator.
Exploring the multi-layered nonsense of this stance is left as an
excercise to the reader (hint: how would one prevent the majority, or
other minorities, from "enforcing" their will against the ones seeking
"injunction").
- --
Zoli fek...@bc.edu, keeper of <http://www.hix.com/hungarian-faq/>
*SELLERS BEWARE: I will never buy anything from companies associated
*with inappropriate online advertising (unsolicited commercial email,
*excessive multiposting etc), and discourage others from doing so too!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMd22dcQ/4s87M5ohAQE+JAIA4ys5LE1/fa4nLZX8o88Uyk/VIBeG6HmC
De5wMPZOH71qv+k8hU1IWJUIl1O3hTEgcqPoBf7JY2AhkoONbsk7Kw==
=hLp7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Yousuf Jokhio
On Thu, 4 Jul 1996, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> Dr. Grubor has suggested amending the voting rules retroactively as follows:
>
> "If more than 300 valid YES votes are counted, the newsgroup is created
> irrespective of the number of NO votes. NO votes are only effective if
> fewer than 300 YES votes are counted."
>
> I second Dr. Grubor's proposal. The man is brilliant!
>
> Thank you, Dr. Grubor, for creating the Internet and guiding its development.
THis seems a wonderful idea for the people who seriously want to create a
newsgroup for their discussions on the internet...... What is the status
of this amendment... Is it still in its early stage or it has been
accepted.... Can this be applied on the soc.culture.sindhi newsgroup's
result???? I would appreciate it if someone clarifies it....
Regards,
Yousuf Jokhio
Gul Agha
In article <uPXJqD...@bwalk.dm.com> d...@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) writes:
> From: d...@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
> Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.culture.russian,soc.culture.sindhi,soc.culture.macedonia,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.tibet,soc.culture.kashmir,news.admin.policy,misc.activism.cannabis,alt.flame.jan-isley
> Date: Thu, 04 Jul 96 13:13:53 EDT
> Organization: Kook Capital of the World, Brighton Beach
>
> In article <slrn44thukd....@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>,
> jmay...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) wrote:
> >On Tue, 02 Jul 1996 01:11:26 -0600, Joe Bernstein <j...@sfbooks.com> wrote:
> Dr. Grubor has suggested amending the voting rules retroactively as follows:
>
> "If more than 300 valid YES votes are counted, the newsgroup is created
> irrespective of the number of NO votes. NO votes are only effective if
> fewer than 300 YES votes are counted."
>
> I second Dr. Grubor's proposal. The man is brilliant!
I agree completely. With the global reach of the internet, this is
particularly pertinent.
We now have many countries coming online that have no democratic
tradition or right of free expression. Moreover, the practice of
oppressing minorities is well entrenched in some of these societies.
The internet, founded on tenents of free expression and flow of ideas,
should not be held hostage to the tyranny of such people's narrow
minded prejudices.
Peace,
Gul Agha,
-----------------------------
Professor Gul Agha Phone: (217)244-3087
Director, Open Systems Laboratory FAX: (217)333-3501
Department of Computer Science Email: ag...@cs.uiuc.edu
1304 W Springfield Ave -------
University of Illinois Secretary: Bonnie Howard
Urbana, IL 61801 (217)333-1043
------- <how...@cs.uiuc.edu>
--
Peace,
Gul Agha
Stephen Boursy
In article <AGHA2.96J...@ganges.cs.uiuc.edu>, Gul Agha
>d...@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) writes:
>
>> From: d...@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
>> Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.culture.russian,soc.culture.sindhi,soc.culture.macedonia,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.tibet,soc.culture.kashmir,news.admin.policy,misc.activism.cannabis,alt.flame.jan-isley
>> Date: Thu, 04 Jul 96 13:13:53 EDT
>> Organization: Kook Capital of the World, Brighton Beach
>>
>> In article <slrn44thukd....@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>,
>> jmay...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) wrote:
>> >On Tue, 02 Jul 1996 01:11:26 -0600, Joe Bernstein <j...@sfbooks.com> wrote:
>
>> Dr. Grubor has suggested amending the voting rules retroactively as follows:
>>
>> "If more than 300 valid YES votes are counted, the newsgroup is created
>> irrespective of the number of NO votes. NO votes are only effective if
>> fewer than 300 YES votes are counted."
>>
>> I second Dr. Grubor's proposal. The man is brilliant!
>
>I agree completely. With the global reach of the internet, this is
>particularly pertinent.
>
>We now have many countries coming online that have no democratic
>tradition or right of free expression. Moreover, the practice of
>oppressing minorities is well entrenched in some of these societies.
>
As it is on the usenet as recently witnessed with the
current fradulant voting system, content based cancels by
vote counters, and persistent attempts to control the
primary product of the Usenet, newsgroups, by UUNET via
David Lawrence.
>The internet, founded on tenents of free expression and flow of ideas,
>should not be held hostage to the tyranny of such people's narrow
>minded prejudices.
>
Yes--I support Dr. Grubors proposal as well most especially
since the current Big Eight voting process is effectively dead.
Steve
news.admin.censorship
Jay Maynard
[*sneck*]
On 06 Jul 1996 12:04:57 GMT, Gul Agha <ag...@ganges.cs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>> In article <slrn44thukd....@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu>,
>> jmay...@admin5.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) wrote:
No, I didn't. Please be careful with attributions. I in no way support
anything the Kook Cabal comes up with, and wrote none of the text quoted.
>The internet, founded on tenents of free expression and flow of ideas,
>should not be held hostage to the tyranny of such people's narrow
>minded prejudices.
I do, however, support this sentiment.
Robert Ames
In article <Pine.SGI.3.91.96070...@chi3.bc.edu>,
"Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq" <fek...@chi3.bc.edu> wrote:
>> Robert Ames (am...@ican.net) wrote:
>> : What is required is that the minority performs its own newgroup and
>> : enforces it.
> But clearly, Ames meant forging newgroup messages - for "minority" here
>means those who failed to win a vote according to the rules and thus don't
>qualify for legitimate creation of the group by the n.a.n. moderator.
No, that's not what I meant at all. I thought I was being clear, but
apparently not. I am suggesting that minorities need to consider
joining into an alternative group creation authority.
Here's an example: Suppose there is something called the Pan-Arab
Foundation (I assume there is no such body). The PAF survey their
members, and determine that there is a need for a newsgroup to be
called soc.culture.pan-arab. They post advisories in news.groups
and elsewhere that on August 1st, they will create the group, and
explain why it is needed. So on August first they issue a newgroup
message. Can you guess what David Lawrence will do? He will add
soc.culture.pan-arab to his list of "bogus newsgroups", and will
issue rmgroup control messages to remove it. Anyone posting to
s.c.p-a will probably receive an email notice from UUNET for each
article they post, claiming that they've posted to a non-existent
group.
In the face of this type of opposition from a company which wants to
maintain hegemony over the Big Eight newsgroups, a minority group
such as the fictional Pan-Arab Foundation would need to apply to the
judicial system for relief.
Much as it would be interesting to continue this debate ad
infinitum, my vacation period is around the corner, and the prospect
of doing some camping and fishing appeals more than continuing some
news.groups controversy. I'll be reviewing messages in this group
for a while, and I may jump in if there is more "Ames advocates
forgery" stupidity, but otherwise I'll be semi-offline for a while.
Russ Allbery
Robert Ames <am...@ican.net> writes:
> Here's an example: Suppose there is something called the Pan-Arab
> Foundation (I assume there is no such body). The PAF survey their
> members, and determine that there is a need for a newsgroup to be called
> soc.culture.pan-arab. They post advisories in news.groups and elsewhere
> that on August 1st, they will create the group, and explain why it is
> needed. So on August first they issue a newgroup message. Can you
> guess what David Lawrence will do? He will add soc.culture.pan-arab to
> his list of "bogus newsgroups", and will issue rmgroup control messages
> to remove it.
Yup. They could have gone through the normal system like everyone else
and they chose not to. People subscribing to Tale's service therefore
presumably do not want the group, since they have subscribed to a service
that only creates groups through a certain procedure, and Tale, acting in
accord with the rules of the service he offers, will remove the group for
those who subscribe to that service.
> Anyone posting to s.c.p-a will probably receive an email notice from
> UUNET for each article they post, claiming that they've posted to a
> non-existent group.
Not unless they make the group moderated. Perhaps you should have read
the rather extensive discussions of this the last time it came up.
If you post to a group which a B news site has marked as moderated but has
no moderation address for, they will attempt to mail the article to a
moderation relay. THIS BEHAVIOR IS BROKEN. Everyone KNOWS this behavior
is broken. THIS IS NOT UUNET's FAULT.
UUNET then gets this post via e-mail, because they offer as a public
service one of the larger moderation relay sites. They didn't ask for
this post. They don't want it. They want the B news sites to fix their
software just as much as everyone else on Usenet does. However, they just
got the post via e-mail whether they asked for it or not, so now they have
to decide what to do with it.
They have two choices; they can either drop the post on the floor, in
which case if it *were* a legitimate post that was misaddressed or
otherwise misdirected the poster loses it, or they can return it to the
apparent poster in case the problem is one that they can fix. Both
approaches have problems. UUNET has decided that the second has fewer
problems associated with it than the first, and I agree.
> In the face of this type of opposition from a company which wants to
> maintain hegemony over the Big Eight newsgroups, a minority group such
> as the fictional Pan-Arab Foundation would need to apply to the judicial
> system for relief.
And they wouldn't get it, since nothing even remotely *approximating*
illegal is going on if you actually bother to learn the truth.
The Watcher
Jay Maynard wrote:
-> representative of". UUNET is nice enough to allow him to perform his duties
-> as news.announce.newgroups moderator on their equipment, on their time, as
-> long as it does not interfere with his job. It is emphatically NOT part of
-> his job description, and if the two conflict, his job takes precedence. He
-> does not represent UUNET in any shape or fashion as moderator of
-> news.announce.newgroups.
Hi Jay.
I must have missed something while I was on vacation.
When did UUNET hire you as their public relations spokesman?
Did Dave put in a good word to help get you hired? ;)
THE WATCHER
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The preceding has been a public sarcastic announcement.
We now return to your regular proselytizing.
Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 5 Jul 1996, Nadeem Jamali wrote:
> Here's something directly from the CFV:
>
> ``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 distribute
> 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 is generally considered to be vote fraud.
> Now if those people do not have Usenet access, how did they get to
> see the CFV, except by someone's emailing it to them.
Like I said, they may have Usenet access. There are ways to retrieve
articles via email as well, and UUNet has a public FTP archive making
the CFVs available too.
Moreover, note that only "Distributing pre-marked or otherwise edited
copies" is considered fraud (according to the UVV). Neither voting that
may have been solicited, nor distribution of unedited CFV is generally
considered fraudulent, however inappropriate.
> I realize it is hard to prove that they don't have access to Usenet,
It is impossible to prove. As a matter of fact, even if they don't have
it as of now, I bet you $100 against $1 that if I got an account there
I'd be acessing news within a day (as I had been for the years when my
immediate host didn't have direct news access).
> but they definitely are less active members of the community.
That's true. But then, wholesale throwing out votes deemed to be from
"less active members" (Usenet is not a community, by the way) would be a
lot worse than having a few dozen inappropriate ones slipped in (which
still should not happen, I agree). Lurkers have always had, as they
should, the same qualification for voting as posters. And the vote is
about a group to be created - which concerns potential readers in the
future, not past participants. Now don't take me wrong, I do not believe
that this particular block of voters is in any ways concerned with
Usenet. But it ought not be up to me, to you or to others to rule that it
is so - for such an arbitrary disqualification then could be applied to
each and every vote contested by anyone.
I think the singular decisive role of one site to skew the whole vote IS
a legitimate reason for calling a revote; the rest is not.
- --
Zoli fek...@bc.edu, keeper of <http://www.hix.com/hungarian-faq/>
*SELLERS BEWARE: I will never buy anything from companies associated
*with inappropriate online advertising (unsolicited commercial email,
*excessive multiposting etc), and discourage others from doing so too!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMd/8v8Q/4s87M5ohAQE8bQH9GwzmlskF2GVbLMq7DhcyFWR24xXyHS+Z
1Eoqu0TNkZ/KebQ/r+AleUmcVf/70NHHQIuv+tIjVQU+dKfig6EARQ==
=1Xve
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Gobind Jhangiani
rajesh kirpalani wrote:
>
> Just in case people think this is this a Indo-Pak thing,
> read on...
>
> The <soc.culture.sindhi> newsgroup, is supported by *both* Muslim
> Sindhis and Hindu Sindhis throught out the world. This is what
> WE Sindhis around the world said we wanted. Therefore this
> is not a Indo-Pak thing... Check the "Yes" Voting results..
>
> The division is between Sindhis who want a Newsgroup and those
> individual who want to deny it to them.
>
> I am dissapointed to discover that some people felt it was to neccessay
> campaign against this newsgroup. So far, 50 out of the 197 "No" votes
> have found to be illegal, these votes came from sites which provide no
> newsgroup access. According to the rules, people who don't have access
> to newsgroup, cannot participate in the vote.
>
> I feel that these illegal voters, were ill-informed about the nature
> of this newsgroup and must have jumped on what thinking it to be a
> Indo-Pak thing.
>
> Without these "50" illegal No Votes, <soc.culture.sindhi> would have
> passed, without problems.
>
> Rajesh Kirpalani
> Proponent : soc.culture.sindhi
Rajesh, we are all with you in your struggle, fight on.
gobind
http://www.inctech.com
Ken Arromdee
[This is a repost, news has not been coming out of Hopkins.]
In article <qumwx0gho...@cyclone.Stanford.EDU>,
Russ Allbery <r...@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
>Yup. They could have gone through the normal system like everyone else
>and they chose not to. People subscribing to Tale's service therefore
>presumably do not want the group, since they have subscribed to a service
>that only creates groups through a certain procedure, and Tale, acting in
>accord with the rules of the service he offers, will remove the group for
>those who subscribe to that service.
If most people who "subscribe" to the "service" have thought it through that
far, I'll be really surprised. Tale's messages work because they are
defaults.
--
Ken Arromdee (arro...@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu, karr...@nyx.nyx.net,
http://www.cs.jhu.edu/~arromdee)
"2000 members of the vegetable kingdom and I have to work with _tomatoes_!"
Russ Allbery
>> Yup. They could have gone through the normal system like everyone else
>> and they chose not to. People subscribing to Tale's service therefore
>> presumably do not want the group, since they have subscribed to a
>> service that only creates groups through a certain procedure, and Tale,
>> acting in accord with the rules of the service he offers, will remove
>> the group for those who subscribe to that service.
> If most people who "subscribe" to the "service" have thought it through
> that far, I'll be really surprised. Tale's messages work because they
> are defaults.
Let's see...I know from personal knowledge and face-to-face discussions
that Stanford has thought it through that far, Internex has thought it
through that far, and Tektronix has thought it through that far. I'm
fairly confident from on-Net discussions that Netcom has also thought it
through that far, as well as world.std.com, netaxs.com, cais.com, Silicon
Graphics, and several others. UUNET obviously has, and so I assume have
MCI and PSI. I'm fairly sure BBN and Cal Berkeley (agate) have as well.
Newsgroup policies at all of those sites differ widely, but I'm fairly
certain that all of them know what is going on and have made conscious
decisions on how they intend to approach matters. In other words, they
all have a definite policy and are not simply relying on the defaults.
And that's a fairly wide cross-section of educational, commercial, and
connectivity sites, including several major backbone providers, and it's
just off the top of my head.
You could also see how many people have Tale's PGP control message
verification software. Anyone who has gone to the trouble of getting that
is pretty much certain to have a fairly firm grasp on what's going on.
Gobind Jhangiani
Rajesh Keswani wrote:
>
> Since the Sindhi Newsgroup was unfortunately defeated, i am hoping that
> someone can privately e-mail me the address to get onto the Sindhi
> newsgroup.
>
> The voting proedure seems unnecessarily beuracratic. I don't understand
> why it is not good enough to show that 348 people want a Sindhi newsgroup.
> Why is it that because there are people opposed to the newsgroup, that
> we can not have a forum to discuss our culture. Just because it is
> controversial does not mean it is not important. It is odd how 100 people
> who want to discuss birds from antarctica (for a hypothetical example) can
> get their newsgroup, but not people who simply want to discuss their
> culture, history, and heritage. There should be a point where the number
> of yes votes supercedes the 2/3 majority needed.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Raj
> raj...@acs.bu.edu
>
> (and please do send information about the mailing list)
Hi Raj
perhaps you could pass it on to me as well
Thanks
Gobind Jhangiani
http://www.inctech.com
GOPAL Ganapathiraju Sree Ramana
In article <4s48cf$9...@nyx.cs.du.edu>,
Ken Arromdee <karr...@nyx.cs.du.edu> wrote:
>
>If most people who "subscribe" to the "service" have thought it through that
>far, I'll be really surprised. Tale's messages work because they are
>defaults.
>Ken Arromdee (arro...@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu, karr...@nyx.nyx.net,
> http://www.cs.jhu.edu/~arromdee)
>
> "2000 members of the vegetable kingdom and I have to work with _tomatoes_!"
i will not be surprised if sysadmin take a more liberal position
and ignore tale's control messages. for example, over months ago
some one sent spurious control mesgs for sci.uttar-pradesh ,
sci.bihar and sci.rajasthan groups, besides others. and despite
several official rmgroup mesgs that might have been issued, these
groups still exist on my sys. whenever JM posts articles through
his compulsive tendencies, i see those articles appearing here.
pr...@bestweb.com
We are with you rajeev and with all who support the sindhi news group
--
Naresh P. Sadhnani
Jln. Sunter Mas Barat II,
H-9, No. 13
Jakarta (Utara) 14350
INDONESIA
Telp : +62-21-6508675
Fax : +62-21-6506152
Mobile : +62-81-6926719
E-Mail : sadh...@rad.net.id
pr...@bestweb.com
Ken Arromdee
In article <qumhgrei1...@cyclone.Stanford.EDU>,
Russ Allbery <r...@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
>> If most people who "subscribe" to the "service" have thought it through
>> that far, I'll be really surprised. Tale's messages work because they
>> are defaults.
You're biasing things by choosing large sites which have been around for a
while.
>You could also see how many people have Tale's PGP control message
>verification software.
How many people have it, then? (It would have made this discussion a little
faster if you had just told me how much it was, instead of waiting for me to
request it from you.)
Russ Allbery
>> Let's see...I know from personal knowledge and face-to-face discussions
>> that Stanford has thought it through that far, (etc)
> You're biasing things by choosing large sites which have been around for
> a while.
But those are also the sites with the most users, and therefore the sites
with the most effect on Usenet overall (not to mention that they're
usually major news propagation sites). You certainly have a point, but I
also think that it says something that most of the major sites know
exactly what they're doing.
>> You could also see how many people have Tale's PGP control message
>> verification software.
> How many people have it, then?
Don't know. Don't even have any good way of finding out. I was just
musing, not offering more information I'm afraid (I would have just come
right out with it if I had it).
I have seen it mentioned a surprising amount by people I wouldn't have
thought were paying that close attention.
Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 4 Jul 1996, Jay Maynard wrote:
> > Trying to judge acceptability of ballots based on what is thought about
> >what's in some voters' mind is an excercise in futility.
>
> I believe that most NO voters these days do so precisely because of
> political reasons. The number of people clueful about Usenet who actually
> vote NO on a bad proposal is seldom over 100.
I concur that at any given time the majority of NOes (and, incidentally,
a good portion of YESes as well) is due to what we may call 'political'.
What I am saying is that there's no way to separate those out, if you are
to give any voice to the "voters" at all. The only option to avoid this
seems to be some kind of 'council of the wise' - but then that would be
the exact opposite of what most people complaining about the lack of
democracy want!
And perhaps this is not such a bad thing after all, or at least not one
that contradicts how the Usenet system has been set out to work. You and
I may agree what's political and what's namespace issue, and which
reasons are appropriate to base voting on and which ones aren't. But
others may think differently, and some may even consider political
considerations a lot more justified than concerns about giving good
names. Remember, I am still waiting for your explanation of why your
opposition (which I share) to sci.aquaria would ab ovo be better than
ours to to r.m.w-p farce, for example - and how do you expect everyone to
come see that way.
I'd loathe to divert all the effort some people, however inappropriately,
put into fighting news.grous wars - toward attacking individual sites that
were to implement n.a.n decisions liberalized to pass everything.
The thing is, the way I see it, that the mainstream group creation
process is designed to signal some consensus, in order for most sites to
be able to accept the results unconditionally, as a rule. If the process
started giving signals of consensual support when such is lacking, then
the utility of it would diminish. In my view pushing any change that may
cause a considerable portion of Usenet admins to decide on newsgroup
creation case-by-case rather then relying on the n.a.n process would be a
VeryBadThing for 'Big 7+1' - a lot worse than having groups falling thru
the cracks here and there! And trying to compel acceptance of groups
failing the IMHO not unreasonably demanding test of the current guidelines
is to move in that direction...
- --
Zoli fek...@bc.edu, keeper of <http://www.hix.com/hungarian-faq/>
*SELLERS BEWARE: I will never buy anything from companies associated
*with inappropriate online advertising (unsolicited commercial email,
*excessive multiposting etc), and discourage others from doing so too!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMemERsQ/4s87M5ohAQHbEgH+JQOJqfGqZk+WEkThGrO9ECn043VcE4iC
k5R6zJcNsuKoJpOPJvO9J4hbdtJY1k/kar08v3vo1+TzRLgxFWTGxg==
=2eaZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Avoid normal situations.
Rajesh Keswani wrote:
: > The voting proedure seems unnecessarily beuracratic. I don't understand
: > why it is not good enough to show that 348 people want a Sindhi newsgroup.
It ain't hard to see, really. Usenet and its legions of groups takes up
huge amounts of disk space already, and some of us don't necessarily want
our .newsrcs taking up 10 megs just so everybody can have their own little
subsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsplinter
group. If you really, truly want a Sindhi newsgroup, and can't get the
well-established margin of victory in the voting, you can take it to alt.*
or start a mailing list.
--
The Stainless Steel Moviegoer
"To know death, Otto... you have to f*ck life in the gall bladder."
-- Baron Frankenstein (Udo Kier), _Andy Warhol's Frankenstein_
GOPAL Ganapathiraju Sree Ramana
In article <4sfmo1$t...@hole.sdsu.edu>,
Avoid normal situations. <maxf...@rohan.sdsu.edu> wrote:
>Rajesh Keswani wrote:
>
>: > The voting proedure seems unnecessarily beuracratic. I don't understand
>: > why it is not good enough to show that 348 people want a Sindhi newsgroup.
>
> It ain't hard to see, really. Usenet and its legions of groups takes up
>huge amounts of disk space already, and some of us don't necessarily want
>our .newsrcs taking up 10 megs just so everybody can have their own little
>subsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsubsplinter
>group.
oh. learn about setting up a .newsrc file, then we will continue
the discussion.