From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 20:58:20 GMT

jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>[news.admin.policy readers: This has gotten into a discussion of newsgroup
>creation policy. Your comments are solicited.]

Agreed! I'd like to hear what the net has to say.

>>Most of them didn't even know a vote was going on...UNLIKE the American
>>political system. And the support was not overwhelming. Most of those 
>>yes votes were from non-participants (see below). They didn't vote FOR
>>it either...
>For this statement to be true, you'll have to convince me that Dave Lawrence
>didn't post the RFD(s) or CFV(s) to rec.music.synth. I think he knows how to
>do his job much better than that. If the CFV(s) were cross-posted to r.m.s,
>then you don't have a complaint.

Even better...some sites that read r.m.s apparently are relays to other 
BBS systems. I do know that there is at least one international MIDI 
group connected to r.m.s...and they do not have email capability. Does
that make them ineligable to vote? 

>>Do you agree that it's unfair for a decision to be made about the name
>>of a newsgroup without the members of that newsgroup having a say-so?
>Yes, I do. Now show that that's the case...

Look at the above. There are a lot of participants out there who are at 
the mercy of those in news.groups should any vote come to pass. Is this
a desirable state of affairs?

>Immaterial. Ther's no way to guarantee that votes come from participants, nor
>is it partucilarly desirable: to do so would disenfranchise those who would
>like to see a better-organized net as a goal unto itself, most especially
>those news administrators who must implement the vote anyway. 

I am all for a better-organized net, but not at the expense of those who
use it daily. The whole reason I am making noise is a direct result of the
noise I saw in r.m.s against the renaming and the arbitrary rename it got.

Look, all the current policies have succeeded in doing is getting news admins
like me (and others) to not honor the results of the vote. I do so for the
help and health of the net.citizens (not just the news.admins). Wouldn't be 
a lot better if everybody who uses a newsgroup could come to a consensus,
instead of a cadre of flamers like us? 

>Control of a newsgroup has never rested completely in the hands of the
>participants in the first place. It has always rested in the hands of news
>admins. Forgetting that has caused as much grief over the years as anything
>else on the net. 
>Show me that admins would agree to having control taken out of their hands,
>and I'll think about how to implement the restriction on voting you suggest.

You may have put your finger on the problem. 

>>Those who use them do not have to be musicians (or can't you tell by today's
>>musical standards). They could be sound card owners, hardware designers,
>>or software engineers. 
>...but they all make music with them, else they don't do anything with the
>card (unless you count random noises).

Not all of them. Some work on user interfaces, some work on digital signal
processing algortihms...some even make random noises in hopes of getting
a good sounding patch. 

>No, I don't worship the Guidelines completely; in particular, I agree with
>Peter da Silva that there needs to be a way to separate selection of a
>newsgroup's name from assessment of interet level in the group,

I agree with that. 

>Single Transferrable Vote system is a good way to get there. Even so, until
>the Guidelines reflect that, living within them is much preferable to living
>without them, for that way lies alt.*. 

My highest priority is the net.users...not the Guidelines. This case has
demonstrated to me that in this situation, the Guidelines are not preferable.
I and my site remain opposed to this result. 

>obstructionism - you simply don't like the result, so you've gotten out the
>torpedos.

Gee...if I *liked* the result do you think we'd be posting about it? 

There's nothing wrong with opposing a counter-productive action. It would
be wrong NOT to oppose it, in my mind. 
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

         It is the wise bird who builds his nest in a tree.