A Hypothetical (at the moment) Question

[Judith]

If the charter of a moderated group was changed to include a requirement that
there was some sort of vote required of the moderation team on say an annual
basis, would it be appropriate for uk.voting to carry out that vote? Would
that be specified in the charter?

[Wm]

uk.net.news.management <rt8aj8hk0lnja48t6...@4ax.com>

On 04/03/2013 22:47, Judith wrote:
>
>
> If the charter of a moderated group was changed to include a requirement that
> there was some sort of vote required of the moderation team on say an annual
> basis, would it be appropriate for uk.voting to carry out that vote?

Yes, they're good at taking votes. We like them as a result. Don't you?

> Would
> that be specified in the charter?

Depends. It may not be binding. Best to check first.

You are not showing your "well side" at the moment whoever you are,
Judith, your "good woman" expressions have disappeared over the last
week or so.

--
Wm ...

[Tony]

You may like to check the charter of uk.gay-lesbian-bi for an example,

http://www.usenet.org.uk/uk.gay-lesbian-bi.html#uk.gay-lesbian-bi

You may also like to speak to UK Voting about it.
--
Tony Evans
Saving trees and wasting electrons since 1993
blog -> http://perceptionistruth.com/
books -> http://www.bookthing.co.uk/
[ anything below this line wasn't written by me ]

[Wm]

uk.net.news.management <kh39go$8qq$1...@dont-email.me>On 04/03/2013 23:09,

Go back to saying your thing in unmanaged groups, Judith.

You have many friends there.

[Wm]

uk.net.news.management <kh3aps$u00$1...@matrix.darkstorm.co.uk>

On 04/03/2013 23:31, Tony wrote:
> In uk.net.news.management, Judith <jmsmi...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> If the charter of a moderated group was changed to include a requirement that
>> there was some sort of vote required of the moderation team on say an annual
>> basis, would it be appropriate for uk.voting to carry out that vote? Would
>> that be specified in the charter?
>
> You may like to check the charter of uk.gay-lesbian-bi for an example,
>
> http://www.usenet.org.uk/uk.gay-lesbian-bi.html#uk.gay-lesbian-bi
>
> You may also like to speak to UK Voting about it.

I'm (group wise) against this getting too mucky.

I think you have fallen for it, Anthony

[Alex]

I think you have to consider why, despite everything as you see it,
Judith has as many friends to be found among all groups.

[danh...@outlook.com]

On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 11:25:08 +0000, Alex
<no_alexis_...@mailcatch.com> wrote:

> Wm <tcn...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >

> >You have many friends there.


> I think you have to consider why, despite everything as you see it,
> Judith has as many friends to be found among all groups.

Well, rather, more like a greek Chous at a solo performance; less
critical, of course, and no where near as melodious as, say, "Der Tod
und das Madchen".

[John Benn]

<danh...@outlook.com> wrote in message
news:almarsoft.1899...@news.aioe.org...

Hello Guy!

[Judith]

hello, hello, hello

It's Peter Walmsley, Mgorle, Dan Harris or should I say Porky Chapman.

Any good court cases on at the moment?

--
Porky Chapman bragged about the fact that he was taking someone he
had accused of harassing him through the court system.
All of a sudden his court case is off. Was it because Porky was scared of
being cross-examined and having to answer questions under oath?
Or did the CPS sling the case out because of Porky's "evidence"?
Why won't he tell us?

[Judith]

On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 11:51:37 -0000, "John Benn" <mrbenn...@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>


>Hello Guy!


Well spotted Mr Benn.

He really is not bright is he? I remember when he posted as Lou Knee and used
the same secure IP address he had been allocated by his place of work. He
wriggled, and wriggled - but never did actually own up.

He once actually said : " a field in which I am considered a thought leader by
VMware, Dell and EMC."

He even put his PGP signature round it so we really knew that it was him and
not a forgery.
Message-ID: <gfmblg$4ul$1...@news.motzarella.org>

Perhaps they all wrote to him out of the blue and said "We think you are a
thought leader in this area Guy".

Or - I suppose he could have made it up - and that's what *he* thinks :-)

[Clive George]

If that's you Guy, stop being a nobhead and using random addresses.
Nymshifting is the mark of an arse, whoever does it.

[John Benn]

"Judith" <jmsmi...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ahqbj8p7f954b35jr...@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 11:51:37 -0000, "John Benn" <mrbenn...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>>Hello Guy!
>
>
> Well spotted Mr Benn.

You can tell by his pretentious manner. He can't help himself.

[Barry Salter]

On 04/03/2013 22:47, Judith wrote:
>
>

There is precedent in UKVoting conducting such votes, namely the
uk.gay-lesbian-bi moderator elections up until 2008.

The only thing I would request would be that such a procedure *NOT*
include the option to reopen nominations (which the uk.glb procedure
does) as it has the potential to "break" STV if it passes quota.

One option would be to follow similar procedures as for the Committee
Elections, and have a percentage of moderators "retiring" each year (but
eligible for re-election) and the same number of vacancies created.

[Tony]

In uk.net.news.management, Barry Salter <sal...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 04/03/2013 22:47, Judith wrote:
>>
>>
>> If the charter of a moderated group was changed to include a requirement that
>> there was some sort of vote required of the moderation team on say an annual
>> basis, would it be appropriate for uk.voting to carry out that vote? Would
>> that be specified in the charter?
>>
>There is precedent in UKVoting conducting such votes, namely the
>uk.gay-lesbian-bi moderator elections up until 2008.

I was going to ask about this earlier, I had assumed the election requests
had stopped at some point in the past.

[paul]

On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 16:38 Tony <to...@darkstorm.invalid> wrote:

>In uk.net.news.management, Barry Salter <sal...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>On 04/03/2013 22:47, Judith wrote:
>>> If the charter of a moderated group was changed to include a requirement that
>>> there was some sort of vote required of the moderation team on say an annual
>>> basis, would it be appropriate for uk.voting to carry out that vote? Would
>>> that be specified in the charter?
>>>
>>There is precedent in UKVoting conducting such votes, namely the
>>uk.gay-lesbian-bi moderator elections up until 2008.
>
>I was going to ask about this earlier, I had assumed the election requests
>had stopped at some point in the past.

More or less, for a combination of reasons. Given the form of vote and
count mandated in ukglb's charter it's virtually impossible for anyone
who stands not to get elected, hence the election process seems almost
entirely pointless to most on the group. That underlying aspect along
with various noises from UKV about modifying the election method (which
would entail the full monty of RFD & CFV), and that the task is now seen
as such an administrative chore and (arising from the days of our chief
troll) also perceived as overly laden with no-win whipping boy baggage,
altogether makes the lack of sufficient moderator volunteers to make a
quorum (four) hardly surprizing. We now get by with three mods and one
admin.

--
paul (C) © 2013 is mine

[Tony]

Thanks Paul, interesting update.