Una Smith una at
Fri Mar 6 16:01:14 EST 1992

marder at writes:

>1. Voting instructions
>I can't remember who it was, but someone suggested that the call for votes
>should explicitly state:-
>YES vote means an intention to read the proposed newsgroup
>NO  means objection to creation of the group
>Those not interested in the proposed newgroup should NOT vote.

I don't like this idea.  It should be yes or no for the proposal,
without conditions.

>2. Inactive group removal
>I have some trouble with Dave Kristofferson's formulation of group
>termination policy.  Perhaps newsgroups put on notice should face a new vote
>and be required to reach the same formula as for new newsgroups.

This strikes me as rather tedious.  I'd rather leave this to the
administrators;  the poor things should have *some* power, to
compensate for all the things they have to do because we want 
them to.

>3. Objectionable groups
>But how about a procedure to close down newgroups after less than 1 year
>(e.g. to allow reorganisation or remove groups that turn nasty/embarassing
>for bionet).

We don't have to decide everything beforehand.  Let's let this one go.


Una Smith   una at    School of the Environment
                                Duke University
                                Durham, NC  27706

More information about the Bioforum mailing list