From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth,news.groups,rec.music.makers
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 4 Nov 92 18:44:20 GMT
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA

rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec) writes:
>Is there some problem with changing the name of the group at the point
>where it's gatewayed?  It seems to me like a trivial change; if it's
>not, why not?

Apparently there is. The maintainers of certain lists have spoken out about
this...which prompted me to take this stance.

>That's a matter of opinion; the Usenet community opinion, as measured
>by the outcome of the vote, would seem to differ.

Not necessarily true...I've had email saying that their no votes weren't 
counted.

>Look, I've been reading and participating in all of the affected groups
>since they began; in the case of rec.music.synth, that goes back several
>years.  I went through three revisions of the proposal that resulted in
>this vote, making modifications at each pass in attempt to build a
>consensus that would appeal to as many people as possible; I listened
>to comments and make changes; I ran a vote and collated the results.

I saw some of that effort and even participated. Remember that
I was the one that asked you for a "rec.music.makers.keyboard" for
keyboard players to discuss techniques and stuff? WHERE did the
"new" synth group come from? I never saw any discussion on that or I would
have stepped in...the new name is not really a "change for the better". 

If you changed my "keyboard" to a "synth" and expected to move r.m.s 
there, that was not my intent at all. I'll grant that "rec.music.synth"
really means "rec.music.midi", but r.m.s was not broken...and I saw 
nothing that attempted to "fix" it until now.

>As best as I could, I followed the guidelines for newsgroup creation
>to the letter, soliciting advice from the news.announce.newgroups
>moderator and others on how to best play by the rules.  Now it's
>your turn (to play by the rules).

Usenet is an anarchy. I will (as a news admin) do what I want to on my
machine. However, I do respect the effort and intent in the guidelines
(insert choir here) that are out there. I usually follow them. This will
be the first time that I have ever stepped in as a rebel. I feel the 
cause is justified...and I may be going out on a limb here. 

There is a question of some no votes not getting counted. Would you 
officially recount the votes, including those that did not get counted
if that is appropriate?

>that the guidelines were followed properly, I'd appreciate it if
>you'd back off the "bad" label.  I understand that you don't like it,
>and don't agree with it, and that's fine; but I would appreciate it
>if you would recognize that I tried to be scrupulously fair about this.

I won't back off the bad label until I've been convinced otherwise.

The two things I see that's unfair are

1) that I never saw any discussion in news.groups or r.m.s about 
changing r.m.s. It just "appeared" on the ballot. Now I voted "NO" 
to it...but I also posted a question about the item on the ballot. 
It was not answered. 

2) I also note that your follow up line is to "rec.music.makers". Why didn't
you follow that to "rec.music.synth" (the affected group)?

I *do* appreciate your intent to be fair, and I respect the tone of your
message. However, some of your actions aren't consistent. I don't mind
discussing this at all, so could you please explain in more detail where
this drive to rename r.m.s came from?
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

Don't teach the blind until you have practiced living with closed eyes