RFD: sci.techniques.scanning-probe
gvrd...@nature.berkeley.edu
unmoderated group sci.techniques.scanning-probe
This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of a
world-wide unmoderated Usenet newsgroup group.name. This is not a
Call for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural
details are below.
Newsgroup line:
sci.techniques.scanning-probe Techniques of scanning probe microscopy.
RATIONALE: sci.techniques.scanning-probe
The field of scanning probe microscopy is a relatively new
intstrumental technique which has a commercial mailing list maintained
by an instrument manufacturer <s...@di.com>. To provide discussion of
techniques, applications, instruments, supplies, current research in
this field in an unmoderated environment would be an ideal use of
USENET for the scientific community.
CHARTER: sci.techniques.scanning-probe
A newsgroup dedicated for the discussion of issues of interest to
those in the scientific field of scanning probe microscopy. These
cover such techniques as atomic force microscopy, scanning tunneling
microscopy, magnetic force microscopy, scanning near field optical
microscopy. The newsgroup is unmoderated allowing anyone to post
questions, comments about instruments, etc, free of censorship. There
is a similar commercial newsgroup which is currently moderated by a
manufacturer (with about 10 messages posted per day). There has been
some questions as to the censorship of messages from other
manufacturers providing information. A newsgroup through usenet would
be more appropriate for this field and could be unmoderated as
requested by its subscribers.
END CHARTER.
PROCEDURE:
This is a request for discussion, not a call for votes. In this phase
of the process, any potential problems with the proposed newsgroups
should be raised and resolved. The discussion period will continue
for a minimum of 21 days (starting from when the first RFD for this
proposal is posted to news.announce.newgroups), after which a Call For
Votes (CFV) may be posted by a neutral vote taker if the discussion
warrants it. Please do not attempt to vote until this happens.
All discussion of this proposal should be posted to news.groups.
This RFD attempts to comply fully with the Usenet newsgroup creation
guidelines outlined in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup" and "How
to Format and Submit a New Group Proposal". Please refer to these
documents (available in news.announce.newgroups) if you have any
questions about the process.
DISTRIBUTION:
This RFD has been posted to the newsgroups:
news.announce.newgroups,
news.groups,
sci.techniques.microscopy
and the mailing list:
Proponent: Gordon Vrdoljak <gvrd...@nature.berkeley.edu>
thomas trenkler
I've been using the mailing-list (s...@di.com) for the last 3 or 4 years.
Personally, I do prefer it to the newsgroups, because the number of
irrelevant messages (or spam) seems rather limited so far.
Hopefully, I do not add to them by sending this one.
I would like to hear the opinion of the spm-digest-users, who receive
only one
summary message per day.
Furthermore, did the Scandinavian spm-discussion-group and mailing-lists
of
other suppliers receive this request for discussion?
I'm afraid, that running all these forums in parallel will only create a
waste of time
and bandwidth.
There are some points in favour of the newsgroup, too.
I agree, that the mailing-list seems to be preferred by users of one
manufacturer,
whatever the reasons may be.
If the newsgroup would create more interaction between users of
different brands of
SPM's, probes, samples, techniques, I'd welcome it.
I would like to encourage a discussion for other possible names for the
newsgroup:
sci.techniques.spm or sci.techniques.sxm.
I wouldn't mind sci.techniques.afm, either.
As an afterthought, the sci.techniques.microscopy always seemed too
broad
for me, therefore I'd prefer to read a more specialized group as
proposed here.
Furthermore, I wonder if it would be worth specializing even more for
issues like
tribology, biological samples, semiconductor applications, etc.
Thomas Trenkler
Physical and chemical analysis group,
IMEC, Leuven, Belgium
e-mail: tren...@imec.be
Disclaimer: This is my very personal opinion, not neccessarily the one
of my employer.
pyr...@gte.net
especially if it's intentions are to take pace of the first. I
reguarly use an sem, and am looking to purchase an afm, and i find the
discussions in the di listserver to be vey interesting and
informitive. I also know from experiance that limited comercial
postings are tolerated. we quite frequenlt see a posting from vendors
offering some new calibration standard, or the latest greatest
substrate material. I personally disposed of over $50,000 worth of
surplus UHV components from two postings on the list, and I was never
asked nor told to limit such 'non-academic' postings. the list is set
up in a fair and efficent way, and I think it should stay, regardless
of the outcome of the usenet matter. along that note I further think
that if there is a vendor who intends to post a large number of
commerial ads, they can do it to an already exsisting group, those
that are intrested can look for such postings there...
Advanced Laser Design
D E Siegel
>
>I've been using the mailing-list (s...@di.com) for the last 3 or 4 years
W hat is the traffic level on this list? How much traffic might move onto the
proposed group? The RFD makes no mention of traffic levels.
>
>Personally, I do prefer it to the newsgroups, because the number of
>irrelevant messages (or spam) seems rather limited so far.
>Hopefully, I do not add to them by sending this one.
>
>
Most sci.* groups don't seem to get much spam. A simple robo-moderator could
be used if people are worried about that -- there are several available.
>
>I would like to encourage a discussion for other possible names for the
>newsgroup:
>sci.techniques.spm or sci.techniques.sxm.
>I wouldn't mind sci.techniques.afm, either.
>
there is some prejudice against abbreviations in newsgroup names in the big-8.
Is this the *ONLY* possible meaning for "spm" in all of sci.* or
sci.techniques.*, neither of which is limited to any particular field or
discipline?
-David E. Siegel
Sie...@ACM.ORG
gvrd...@nature.berkeley.edu
> Personally, I do prefer it to the newsgroups, because the number of
> irrelevant messages (or spam) seems rather limited so far.
sci.techniques.microscopy or sci.techniques.spectroscopy, you'll find
them very spam free. I find only one or two spam messages every
two months, which is currently less than the spm mailing list.
> I would like to hear the opinion of the spm-digest-users, who receive
> only one
> summary message per day.
I've forwarded messages from the spm mailing list to this newsgroup
as requested.
> Furthermore, did the Scandinavian spm-discussion-group and mailing-lists
> of
> other suppliers receive this request for discussion?
I've never even heard of this alternate mailing list. This shows how
a usenet group is more appropriate for people working in various
regions of the world to share ideas. Usenet groups are much more
easier to find than mailing lists.
> There are some points in favour of the newsgroup, too.
> I agree, that the mailing-list seems to be preferred by users of one
> manufacturer,
> whatever the reasons may be.
If I was a manufacturer in competition with Digital instruments, I would
not send my customers to a Digital instruments mailing list. There
would be too much chance of your competitor swaying people to buy
their products rather than yours. Hopefully with an unmoderated
newsgroup, manufacturers can refer everyone to this proposed newsgroup.
> I would like to encourage a discussion for other possible names for the
> newsgroup:
> sci.techniques.spm or sci.techniques.sxm.
> I wouldn't mind sci.techniques.afm, either.
I actually proposed sci.techniques.spm, but the volunteers handling
my request suggested that acronyms are too easily misinterpreted.
scanning-probe is actually easier to find for the uninitiated.
I couldn't think of any other appropriate names.
gvrd...@nature.berkeley.edu
>the list is set
> up in a fair and efficent way, and I think it should stay, regardless
> of the outcome of the usenet matter.
and any changes in structure/management they may have. A usenet
newsgroup could be far more permanent and less likely to be
influenced. You'll have to admit that there is a conflict of ineterest
that could arise if Digital Instruments wanted to promote an
instrument over a competitors (which is right for them to do as a
company) when they are running the mailing list.
A unmoderated newsgroup can be recommended by all manufacturers to
communicate through for their users.
> along that note I think
> that if there is a vendor who intends to post a large number of
> commerial ads, they can do it to an already exsisting group, those
> that are intrested can look for such postings there...
My intent was not to get vendor ads, but that is fine. I'd like
to hear from other companies. My intent was to increase communication
among all users of scanning probe instruments - not just Digital
instruments users.
> Advanced Laser Design
> On Wed, 02 Dec 1998 10:13:32 +0100, thomas trenkler
> <thomas....@imec.be> wrote:
>
> >Hello,
> >
> >I've been using the mailing-list (s...@di.com) for the last 3 or 4 years.
> >
> >Personally, I do prefer it to the newsgroups, because the number of
> >irrelevant messages (or spam) seems rather limited so far.
> >Hopefully, I do not add to them by sending this one.
> >
> >I would like to hear the opinion of the spm-digest-users, who receive
> >only one
> >summary message per day.
> >Furthermore, did the Scandinavian spm-discussion-group and mailing-lists
> >of
> >other suppliers receive this request for discussion?
> >
> >I'm afraid, that running all these forums in parallel will only create a
> >waste of time
> >and bandwidth.
> >
> >There are some points in favour of the newsgroup, too.
> >I agree, that the mailing-list seems to be preferred by users of one
> >manufacturer,
> >whatever the reasons may be.
> >
> >If the newsgroup would create more interaction between users of
> >different brands of
> >SPM's, probes, samples, techniques, I'd welcome it.
> >
> >I would like to encourage a discussion for other possible names for the
> >newsgroup:
> >sci.techniques.spm or sci.techniques.sxm.
> >I wouldn't mind sci.techniques.afm, either.
> >
gvrd...@nature.berkeley.edu
> >I've been using the mailing-list (s...@di.com) for the last 3 or 4 years
>
> W hat is the traffic level on this list? How much traffic might move onto the
> proposed group? The RFD makes no mention of traffic levels.
Usually there are from 8-20 messages per day on the mailing list.
It gets very quiet around vacation time though.
> Is this the *ONLY* possible meaning for "spm" in all of sci.* or
> sci.techniques.*, neither of which is limited to any particular field >or discipline?
I couldn't come up with any better names myself, but think
scanning probe microscopy is appropriate.
Thank you for your comments.
Gordon
>
>
>
> -David E. Siegel
> Sie...@ACM.ORG
H.K.
David Bostwick
unmoderated group sci.techniques.scanning-probe
Instructions for voting are just before the ballot itself. Please read
them before voting. If you have questions about the voting process,
ask the votetaker.
This CFV is to be distributed only by the votetaker. It is not to be
posted to newsgroups, or mailed to mailing lists or individuals, except by
the votetaker, and it is not to be placed on the World Wide Web. Ballots
or CFVs provided by anyone except the votetaker will be invalid.
Newsgroups line:
sci.techniques.scanning-probe Discussion of scanning probe microscopy.
Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC, 4 Feb 1999.
This vote is being conducted by a neutral third party. Questions
about the proposed group should be directed to the proponent.
Proponent: Gordon Vrdoljak <gvrd...@nature.berkeley.edu>
Votetaker: David Bostwick <bost...@cas.chemistry.gatech.edu>
RATIONALE: sci.techniques.scanning-probe
The newsgroup proposed should be created as it will provide an open forum
for discussion of techniques and current research for scanning probe
microscopy. The current private mailing list has an active membership
with numerous daily postings which could easily be switched to USENET
format. Furthermore, in this growing science field, it is easier to read
and post messages to such a USENET group than the privately subscribed
mailing list. The current mailing list is run by a leading instrument
manufacturer, which opens the potential for censorship of messages going
against their products. An unmoderated newsgroup would allow all
instrument manufacturers and users to share information free of the
possibility of censorship.
CHARTER: sci.techniques.scanning-probe
An open forum for discussion of techniques, theory, instrumentation, and
research in the use of scanning probe microscopes. Such instruments would
include, but not be limited to: atomic force microscopy, scanning
tunneling microscopy, magnetic force microscopy, friction force
microscopy, and scanning near-field microscopy. Inappropriate postings
would be postings entirely unrelated to the above techniques.
END CHARTER.
DISTRIBUTION:
In addition to the groups named in the Newsgroups: header, the CFV
and the eventual RESULT posts will be mailed to these mailing lists:
Mailing list name: s...@di.com
Submission address: s...@di.com
Request address (optional): s...@di.com
IMPORTANT VOTING PROCEDURE NOTES: READ THIS BEFORE VOTING
Only one vote is allowed per person or per account. Duplicate votes
will be resolved in favor of the most recent valid vote. Addresses and
votes of all voters will be listed in the final voting results post.
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.
The use of spam blockers or other munged addresses will prevent you from
receiving an acknowledgement of your vote. If the address cannot be
verified, the ballot will be disallowed.
Vote counting is automated, and 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 is your responsibility to make sure your vote
is registered correctly.
The purpose of a Usenet vote is to determine the genuine interest of
persons who would read a proposed newsgroup. Soliciting votes from
uninterested parties defeats this purpose. Please do not distribute
this CFV. Instead, 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, ask the votetaker.
HOW TO VOTE:
Extract the ballot from the CFV by deleting everything before the
"BEGINNING OF BALLOT" and after the "END OF BALLOT" lines. Don't worry
about the spacing of the columns or any quote characters (">") that your
reply inserts. Please do not send the entire CFV back to me.
Fill in the ballot as shown below. Please provide a valid name and
indicate your desired vote in the appropriate locations inside the ballot.
When finished, MAIL the ballot to: <bost...@cas.chemistry.gatech.edu>.
Just "replying" to this message should work, but check the "To:" line.
Examples of how to properly indicate your vote (do not vote here):
[ YES ] example.yes.vote
[ NO ] example.no.vote
[ ABSTAIN ] example.abstention
[ CANCEL ] example.cancellation
DO NOT modify, alter or delete any information in this ballot!
If you do, the voting software will probably reject your ballot.
If these instructions are unclear, please ask the votetaker.
======== BEGINNING OF BALLOT: Delete everything before this line =======
.-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Do not edit anything in this ballot, except to add your name and vote.
|
| 1ST CALL FOR VOTES: sci.techniques.scanning-probe
| Official Usenet Voting Ballot <STS-0001> (Do not remove this line!)
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Please provide a valid name, or your vote may be rejected. Place
| ONLY your name (i.e., do not include your e-mail address or any other
| information) after the colon on the line below.
Voter name:
| Insert YES, NO, ABSTAIN, or CANCEL inside the brackets for each
| newsgroup listed below (do not delete the newsgroup name):
Your Vote Newsgroup
--------- -----------------------------------------------------------
[ ] sci.techniques.scanning-probe
======== END OF BALLOT: Delete everything after this line ==============
This CFV was created with uvpq 1.0 (Aug 27 1997).
PQ datestamp: 980322
--
Voting address : bost...@cas.chemistry.gatech.edu
David Bostwick
unmoderated group sci.techniques.scanning-probe
Proponent: Gordon Vrdoljak <gvrd...@nature.berkeley.edu>
Votetaker: David Bostwick <bost...@cas.chemistry.gatech.edu>
RATIONALE: sci.techniques.scanning-probe
CHARTER: sci.techniques.scanning-probe
END CHARTER.
DISTRIBUTION:
HOW TO VOTE:
..-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Do not edit anything in this ballot, except to add your name and vote.
|
| 2ND CALL FOR VOTES: sci.techniques.scanning-probe
| Official Usenet Voting Ballot <STS-0002> (Do not remove this line!)
David Bostwick
unmoderated group sci.techniques.scanning-probe fails 75:63
There were 75 YES votes and 63 NO votes, for a total of 138 valid votes.
There were 7 abstains and 2 invalid ballots.
For group passage, YES votes must be at least 2/3 of all valid (YES and NO)
votes. There also must be at least 100 more YES votes than NO votes.
There is a five day discussion period after these results are posted.
Unless serious allegations of voting irregularities are raised, the group may
not be voted on again for six months.
Newsgroups line:
sci.techniques.scanning-probe Discussion of scanning probe microscopy.
The voting period ended at 23:59:59 UTC, 4 Feb 1999.
This vote was conducted by a neutral third party. Questions
about the proposed group should be directed to the proponent.
Proponent: Gordon Vrdoljak <gvrd...@nature.berkeley.edu>
Votetaker: David Bostwick <bost...@cas.chemistry.gatech.edu>
RATIONALE: sci.techniques.scanning-probe
The newsgroup proposed should be created as it will provide an open forum
for discussion of techniques and current research for scanning probe
microscopy. The current private mailing list has an active membership
with numerous daily postings which could easily be switched to USENET
format. Furthermore, in this growing science field, it is easier to read
and post messages to such a USENET group than the privately subscribed
mailing list. The current mailing list is run by a leading instrument
manufacturer, which opens the potential for censorship of messages going
against their products. An unmoderated newsgroup would allow all
instrument manufacturers and users to share information free of the
possibility of censorship.
CHARTER: sci.techniques.scanning-probe
An open forum for discussion of techniques, theory, instrumentation, and
research in the use of scanning probe microscopes. Such instruments would
include, but not be limited to: atomic force microscopy, scanning
tunneling microscopy, magnetic force microscopy, friction force
microscopy, and scanning near-field microscopy. Inappropriate postings
would be postings entirely unrelated to the above techniques.
END CHARTER.
DISTRIBUTION:
The CFV for this group was mailed to the following mailing list:
Mailing list name: s...@di.com
Submission address: s...@di.com
Request address (optional): s...@di.com
sci.techniques.scanning-probe Final Vote Ack
Voted Yes
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ac <at> Soft-Imaging.com Andrew Cahill
alan <at> sngrc3.demon.co.uk Alan Brain
alessandro.delbianco <at> joanneum.ac.at Alessandro Del Bianco
alex.dawson <at> uea.ac.uk Alex Dawson
anne_simp <at> yahoo.com Anne Simpson
antenna <at> btinternet.com John Garrett
awang <at> thermomicro.com Albert Wang
bc <at> buphyc.bu.edu Bernard Chasan
Bob_Holthausen <at> pall.com R. Holthausen
BradB <at> Accurel.com Brad Burrow
brian.eddy <at> boeing.com Brian Eddy
celticwiccan <at> hotmail.com Peter Byron
CHARRA <at> DRECAM.CEA.fr Fabrice CHARRA
Chris.Kohler <at> wl.com CHRIS KOHLER
cialoni <at> chupchick.weizmann.ac.il Shaul Aloni
consoli <at> sci.kun.nl Luca Consoli
danker <at> uni-muenster.de Timm Danker
dany.steyaert <at> ping.be Dany Steyaert
david <at> pottage.demon.co.uk david pottage
davidsen <at> tmr.com Bill Davidsen
DMoravits <at> swri.edu Don Moravits
DNicolella <at> swri.edu Daniel P. Nicolella
dptsai <at> phy.ccu.edu.tw Din Ping Tsai
dray <at> csd.uwm.edu Daniel Giese
dvdb <at> huckel.cm.utexas.edu David A. Vanden Bout
ellis <at> ftel.net Rick Ellis
eugene.leitl <at> lrz.uni-muenchen.de Eugene Leitl
frank <at> cmp01ww7.ww.uni-erlangen.de Gerhard Frank
gvrdolja <at> nature.Berkeley.EDU Gordon Vrdoljak
gvw <at> sfu.ca Gavin Wheeler
Heinz.Sturm <at> bam.de Heinz Sturm
henryb <at> tigerdrive.com Henry "Hank" Becker
jfj <at> imagemet.com Jan F. Jorgensen
jharper <at> tamu.edu John Harper
jkramer <at> merlin.sccs.swarthmore.edu Joshua Kramer
john.walton <at> umist.ac.uk john walton
johna <at> thermomicro.com John D. Alexander
jstein <at> tamu.edu Jeremy Steinshnider
juan <at> castelar.ml.org Juan de la Figuera
kale <at> cric.chemres.hu Erika Kalman
kimdv <at> best.com Kim DeVaughn
lfei <at> memc.com lu fei
MAARTEN.CANNAERTS <at> student.kuleuven.ac.be Maarten Cannaerts
Melissa.Hines <at> Cornell.edu Melissa A. Hines
mick <at> uni-duesseldorf.de Uwe Mick
mooney <at> jeol.com Chuck Mooney
mra <at> pobox.com Mark Atwood
niehus <at> physik.hu-berlin.de Horst Niehus
nsmith <at> micro.ti.com Neal L. Smith
pan <at> syix.com Pan
persa <at> ifm.liu.se Per Sandstrom
phcmd <at> getafix.utr.ac.za DEMANET
qingling_z <at> hotmail.com qingling zhang
qsales <at> quesant.com Thomas Pelnar
r.t.simchick <at> larc.nasa.gov Dick Simchick
roses <at> capecod.net Dolores Scaldini Klimm
schaeferag <at> access.ch Klaus A. Schaefer, Dipl.Ing.,Dipl.Chem.
schaefergmbh <at> compuserve.com Martin Schaefer
Stephen.Nanchy <at> wl.com Stephen Nanchy
Stuart.Lindsay <at> asu.edu Stuart Lindsay
taf2 <at> po.cwru.edu Todd A. Farmerie
testsolutions <at> worldnet.att.net Phil Wolf
tftf <at> tds.net Thomas L. Ferrell
titanrdd <at> hol.gr Dr Aristotelis J. Papageorgiou
tmoeller <at> NORAN.com Timo
torzo <at> padova.infm.it Giacomo Torzo
trevort <at> inorth.on.ca Trevor Tymchuk
unertl <at> maine.edu W. N. Unertl
Vhaeren <at> imec.be Vanhaeren Danielle
vote <at> kholdan.snafu.de tobias erle
W.Neun <at> online.de Wolfgang J. Neun
WmHBlair <at> verio.com William H. Blair
xanthian <at> well.com Kent Paul Dolan
ymartin <at> us.ibm.com Yves Martin
zheming.wang <at> pnl.gov Zheming Wang
Voted No
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
arunan.nadarajah <at> utoledo.edu Arunan Nadarajah
asm <at> indy.net Don Chernoff
augustbh <at> jmu.edu Brian Augustine
bossmang <at> pacbell.net Aaron Marquez
cev <at> ornl.gov Catherine E Vallet
cz <at> ipc.uni-tuebingen.de Christiane Ziegler
david <at> farrar.com David Farrar
DD723708 <at> MSXWHWTC.shell.com David Denley
dilickjm <at> home.com John Dilick
dmprice <at> globalnet.co.uk Duncan Price
ebright <at> mbcl.rutgers.edu Richard H. Ebright
egadsby <at> kcc.com Elizabeth Gadsby
Ekkehard.Uthke <at> gmx.de Ekkehard Uthke
elshaw <at> MIT.EDU Elisabeth L. Shaw
ferret <at> enteract.com Karl Meyer
Francis.Gramkowski <at> wdc.com Francis Gramkowski
GMShedd <at> aol.com Gordon Shedd
gprrspw <at> snet.net G.P. Ryan
Gunnar.Pettersen <at> matek.sintef.no Gunnar Pettersen
jason <at> gaydeceiver.com Jason Steiner
jbenis+ <at> pitt.edu jason Bemis
jennifer_wall <at> goodyear.com J.F. Wall
jfc2u <at> unix.mail.virginia.edu John Conroy
John.Blendell <at> nist.gov John Blendell
jshultz <at> comp.uark.edu John Shultz
jtd <at> wsu.edu J. Thomas Dickinson
jvillar <at> biotite.nist.gov John Villarrubia
kamins <at> hpltk.hpl.hp.com Ted Kamins
kenjohnson <at> micron.com Ken Johnson
knapp <at> ifr.mavt.ethz.ch Helmut F. Knapp
lwchen <at> cmliris.harvard.edu Liwei Chen
mark.vanlandingham <at> nist.gov Mark R. VanLandingham
mcellimt <at> uwec.edu Marcus T. McEllistrem
meyer <at> UDel.Edu Robert Keown
monte <at> di.com Monte Heaton
N.D.Gray <at> soton.ac.uk Nick Gray
naddy <at> mips.rhein-neckar.de Christian Weisgerber
nanosensors <at> compuserve.com Peter Besmens
narayan <at> rri.ernet.in VEDAGIRI LAKSHMINARAYAN
olav <at> viking.mv.com Olav Nieuwejaar
PattonSL <at> Npt.NUWC.Navy.Mil Scott Patton
peter <at> physics.mcgill.ca Peter Grutter
r5555c <at> email.sps.mot.com Alan Chapman
raiteri <at> wintermute.chemie.uni-mainz.de Roberto Raiteri
RandTSkye <at> compuserve.com Richard Skye
requicha <at> stromboli.usc.edu Ari Requicha
richard.beanland <at> gecm.com Richard Beanland +44 1327 356363
richard.larker <at> indexator.se Richard Larker
rick <at> bcm.tmc.edu Richard Miller
Robert.Stark <at> lrz.uni-muenchen.de Robert Stark
schmid <at> iap.tuwien.ac.at Michael Schmid
stainles <at> bga.com Dwight Brown
Susanne.Opalka <at> alcoa.com Susanne Opalka
takacs <at> bnl.gov Peter Z. Takacs
thomas <at> physchem.kth.se Thomas Ederth
thomas.trenkler <at> imec.be Thomas Trenkler
today <at> di.com Todd Day
ungerm <at> its.caltech.edu Marc A. Unger
Volker.Dehnke <at> tu-clausthal.de Volker Dehnke
walters <at> rice.edu Deron Walters
woolley <at> core.fas.harvard.edu Adam Woolley
yip <at> ibme.utoronto.ca Chris Yip
yuan <at> ChE.UDel.Edu Yonghui Yuan
Abstained
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
chris <at> kzim.com Christopher Robin Zimmerman
dirkb <at> alkali.otago.ac.nz Dirk Bokern
JENNS <at> VISUS.JNJ.com John Enns
jwdrelic <at> mtu.edu Jaroslaw Drelich
martijn <at> inlv.demon.nl Martijn Dekker
merlin <at> A470.demon.co.uk Darren Wyn Rees
nysten <at> poly.ucl.ac.be NYSTEN Bernard
Votes in error
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LUCIO <at> if.ufrgs.br
! No name given
uniscan <at> uniscan.demon.co.uk Uniscan Instruments Ltd
! Institutional vote