From: floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson)
Subject: Re: soc.culture.native
Organization: University of Alaska Computer Network
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 03:51:47 GMT

I'm just chopping out part of Gary's post to say that I agree with
a straw vote on the concepts he puts forward.  I think such a vote
would provide a very clear path to follow because the choices
offered are logically related in a way that does in fact indicated
what voters really want.

There is a two week period between now and the end of the holiday
break during which I don't think it would be a good idea to vote
on anything.  We can roll this around and make sure we get the
questions right in the mean time.  I'm not sure what the deadline
for moving to a CFV is, but it would seem a 2 week extention should
be easy to obtain, considering the time of year.

I would also like to second Gary's recommendation regarding Jan
Isley's offer to assist a vote.  His experience with handling
multiple ballot voting where a complete hierarchy is being
proposed is a very valuable asset.  He has been known to do that
with techie groups and pull it off without causing a three month
flame fest over the way it was done!

In article <1992Dec19.221517.112@gnosys.svle.ma.us> gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us (Gary S. Trujillo) writes:
>
>I'd like to propose that we hold a new straw vote, to commence shortly
>after people are back from their holidays, to answer some questions
>that seem to be plaguing this discussion, including (but not limited
>to):
>
>     1. Should we create a new newsgroup sub-hierarchy (e.g. "soc.
>	culture.native") under which regional or discussion / non-
>	discussion newsgroups can be nested?
>
>     2. Which of the names "native," "indigenous," "aboriginal" do
>	we most favor for the sub-hierarchy name?
>
>     3. What do people feel about linking the new newsgroups with
>	existing NativeNet mailing lists?
>
>     4. Does a majority of our potential voting public approve of the
>	idea of initially creating two new newsgroups, one to handle
>	informational postings and simple question and answer kinds of
>	things, with the other newsgroup being for discussion?  (This
>	idea would require two separate votes, but we have a volunteer,
>	in the person of Jan Isley (hi, Jan! :-) who has conducted at
>	least one successful multi-way multiple vote, which is about
>	as complex as you can get (in that case, as I recall, even the
>	names of the multiple newsgroups were decided in the vote itself -
>	not that I advise doing so here, since it's much better to get
>	those kinds of things hashed out in the course of discussion).
>
>
>Here is a modified form of the sample straw vote outline I posted a few
>days ago which might be used as a first draft of a new ballot:
>
>    1. Do you feel the newsgroup(s) created as a result of a successful
>       vote should be for the purpose of discussing:
>
>       a. only the indigenous peoples of the U.S. and Canada
>
>       b. the indigenous peoples of all the Americas
>
>       c. the indigenous peoples of the world, including, for instance,
>          the aboriginal peoples of Australia and New Zealand, those of
>          Siberia and those of the Scandanavian countries (the Sami),
>	  those of Indonesia and Malaysia (e.g. the Penan and other abo-
>	  riginal peoples of Sarawak, those of Japan (the Ainu), etc.
>
>       d. other (please specify)
>
>    2. If you have chosen 1 (a) or (b), would you like the group to be
>       called:
>
>       a. soc.culture.native-america
>
>       b. soc.culture.amerind
>
>       c. soc.culture.<something>.american
>          (where "<something>" is one of {native, indigenous, aboriginal})
>
>       d. other (please specify)
>
>
>    3. If you have chosen 1 (c) or (d), or 2 (c), what would you like
>       the "<something>" to be?  Would you prefer:
>
>       a. soc.culture.native
>
>       b. soc.culture.indigenous
>
>       c. soc.culture.aboriginal
>
>       d. other (please specify)
>
>
>    4. Again, if you support the creation of a newsgroup hierarchy for
>       information and discussion about the indigenous peoples of the
>       world (not just the Americas), do you have any objections to the
>       linkage between the NativeNet mailing lists NATIVE-L and/or NATCHAT
>       with corresponding Usenet newsgroups?  If so, what is the nature of
>       your objection?  (optional)

Question number 4 askes for an essay, and there is no way to
measure the answers...  We might want to offer a multiple choice
from 1 to 5 like:

   a.  The two MUST be linked.
   b.  Prefer that it be linked, but ok if not.
   c.  Don't care.
   d.  Prefer that it not be linked, but ok if it is.
   e.  The two must NOT be linked.

>    5. Would you be in favor of the creation of two newsgroups initially,
>       one to carry informational postings, and the other for discussion?
>       (This item is especially important in linking Usenet and NativeNet
>       forums.)  Would you prefer:
>
>       a. soc.culture.<something>.info  and
>          soc.culture.<something>.d
>
>       b. soc.culture.<something>       and
>          soc.culture.<something>.d
>
>       d. other (please specify)

I prefer either a or b above, but I suspect that others may want some
different options made available to vote on.

Floyd
-- 
floyd@ims.alaska.edu        A guest on the Institute of Marine Science computer
Salcha, Alaska              system at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks.