PLEASE stop posting votes!

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Max Hauser

Nov 26, 1987, 2:32:33 PM11/26/87
> From: fa...@ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU (Erik E. Fair)
> Newsgroups: news.groups
> Votes will be posted to the network by ignorant people no matter
> what we do. news.poll will not change this.
> Erik E. Fair ucbvax!fair

As though in an effort to confirm Erik's assertion, articles of
the following content have since appeared in news.groups
(edited to essence):

> I vote YES for Amnesty International
> Here is my vote for cricket.
> Here is my vote for
> I vote YES.
> NO
> Yes
> >I give up on finding a path to cunyvm... I vote yes
> YES FOR ME TOO!!!!!!!!
> Sorry about this posting, but I, too, have been unable to find a path.

Sorry about this reminder, but posted votes are not only invalid, and
are disregarded by the cabal and other readers in any authentication
proceeding, but they are obnoxious too. If someone cannot find a mail
path, that is simply too f'ing bad. The burden is on the voter to reach
the vote collector by e-mail, and on the vote collector to demonstrate
a *substantial* volume of support for the new group. If the support is
so marginal that e-mail paths make a critical difference in the
number of received votes, there is obviously not adequate support for
the creation or change of the group! If the vote counter's site is
"hard to reach by e-mail" then that person should not collect votes.

Is it not obvious that the loss of some votes because of mail
problems is far less harmful than cluttering the Usenet with articles
containing votes (THOUSANDS of copies of which then go out all over
the world)?

People are reminded of all this regularly on news.groups - a strict
protocol of that group that they are expected, as with other groups,
to be familiar with before posting (or cross-posting!) articles to it.

Usenet, like Un*x, is a non-self-documented system that relies on user
competence for smooth operation. It is therefore obvious, or should
be, that it is up to users to know about things like voting procedure
before they do them, and it is furthermore legitimate to hold users
responsible for such knowledge (whether "anyone told them" or not).

In an effort to preach beyond the realm of the converted, I have
cross-posted to the same groups as the offending vote articles.
Appended is further authoritative guidance on this specific topic.

M. Hauser, curmudgeon

> From: (Gene Spafford)
> Newsgroups: news.announce.newusers,news.groups,news.admin
> Subject: How to Create a New Newsgroup (Last changed: 31 October 1987)
> ... action on Usenet
> newsgroup creation or deletion that does not follow these guidelines
> may be ignored by the backbone sites and the majority of Usenet sites
> that usually follow the examples set by the backbone...
> ...
> 3) Post an article to the newsgroup "news.groups" describing your
> proposed new group. Be sure to describe why you think the group is
> needed and/or interesting, and what you think it should be named. Ask
> for comments to be posted and for votes to be *MAILED* to you. Be sure
> to cross-post your article to any newsgroups where there might be
> interest, but set the "Followup-to" header so that responses only
> go to the "news.groups" group.
> ...
> 5) Collect MAILED votes on the issue of the new newsgroup. The
> threshold currently set as necessary for creating a new group is 100
> more "yes" votes than "no" votes in a 30 day period...

> From: (Bob Larson)
> Newsgroups: news.misc,news.groups,news.admin
> Subject: Newsgroup vote counting: a proposed modifacation

> Any vote posted for creating a new newsgroup shall count as
> two votes against creating that newsgroup. The same person will be
> allowed to mail a single vote to the vote counter as well. .Anl

Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages