FIRST CALL FOR VOTES (of 2)
This is the first of two Call For Votes (CFV) regarding the proposed
creation of a new newsgroup. Please read the proposal before voting.
Detailed instructions for voting are given below.
Unmoderated group sci.anthropology.paleo
sci.anthropology.paleo Evolution of man and other primates.
Votes must be received by 23:59:59 GMT, 15 December 1993.
This vote is being conducted by a neutral third party. All questions
regarding voting and procedure or reports of problems should be mailed
to Jan Isley <jan at bagend.atl.ga.us>.
Votes should be mailed to usenet-votes at mathcs.emory.edu.
All questions regarding the proposed new group should be mailed to
the proposer, Danny Yee <danny at orthanc.cs.su.OZ.AU>
This CFV will be posted to the following mailing lists:
anthro-l at ubvm.cc.buffalo.edudarwin-l at ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
sci.anthropology.paleo is for the discussion of the evolution of the
genus Homo, and more generally of the primates. Some of the topics
likely to be covered include:
* primatology (primate social interactions, comparative morphology, ape
* paleoanthropology "proper" (discussion of new fossil finds, etc.)
* the origins of human language and cognition
* the origins of distinctive human morphological features (bipedalism,
big brain, hairlessness, etc.)
* biological and genetic variation in Homo sapiens relevant to our evolution
(e.g. mitochondrial DNA studies)
* sociobiological arguments that rely on evolutionary considerations.
Some subjects recently debated that would find a place in
* The "African Eve" vs multi-regionalism debate
* The Aquatic Ape
Often it is easier to define something by explaining what it isn't, or
by looking at its boundaries with similar entities. An example of this
from biology is the Biological Species Concept, where species are
defined in terms of the mechanisms separating them from other species
(Ernst Mayr, 1969b); in anthropology the nature of the boundaries
between different groups are often critical to their self-identification
(see Frederik Barth, _Ethnic Groups and Boundaries_, 1969). So in order
to explain what belongs in sci.anthropology.paleo a discussion of the
boundaries with the "neighbouring" newsgroups may help.
*** sci.bio.evolution (if created), sci.bio, bionet.molbio.evolution
Discussions particular to human or primate evolution belong in
sci.anthropology.paleo; those on general evolutionary principles and on
the specific evolutionary histories of other taxa in sci.bio.evolution.
There is some overlap in the application of general theories, methods
and models of evolutionary biology to the primates in particular. There
are also significant overlaps with sci.bio and bionet.molbio, and some
crossposting is expected there.
Some sample questions that would make appropriate crossposts are:
* Is there evidence for punctuated equilibrium in human evolution?
* What are the physiological features of aquatic mammals that are shared
by man? (sci.bio)
* How does the latest work on molecular clocks tie in with the dating of
the Pan/Homo split? (bionet.molbio.evolution)
*** sci.anthropology (with acknowledgements to Cameron Laird)
In general anything which refers directly to human evolution
should be posted to sci.anthropology.paleo. Some examples of
questions which should be crossposted are:
* What material constraints (water, temperature, energy, protein, ...)
limit traditional human cultures which exploit savannahs? Should we
expect the same to be true of australopithecines?
* Where can I find the best contemporary data which might speak to
multi-regional origins of our species? Has anyone updated [Smith 1991]
on continuities in jaw anatomy between neanderthals and modern
* The sizes of viable cultural communities recorded in HRAF seem to
bottom out around several hundred. Paleo-anthropologists most often
talk about bands of at most two dozen hominids. When did our ancestors
start identifying with larger groups?
Discussion of religious issues belongs in talk.origins; it is not
appropriate for sci.anthropology.paleo. It is envisaged that there will
be few crossposts between the two groups, and those that do occur will
narrow followups to one of the groups. Appropriate material for a
crosspost might be a request for information on a scientific aspect of
human evolution that happens to be important in the context of a debate
*** sci.lang, alt.memetics
Discussion of non-biological (linguistic or cultural) evolution is not
within the sci.anthropology.paleo charter. Discussion of the relevance
of ape language experiments to understanding of the origins of human
language could appropriately be cross-posted between sci.lang and
Discussion of the origins of human cognitive abilities might be
appropriately crossposted to sci.cognitive and sci.anthropology.paleo.
An example would be the invocation of evolutionary arguments in
_Consciousness Explained_ (Dennett 1991).
*** alt.alien.visitors, sci.skeptic
Claims of extraterrestrial involvement in human origins belong in these
Please note, however, that the above are only guidelines. Posters should
use their own discretion, but they are encouraged to think about both the
Newsgroups: and Followups-To: lines of their posts. I can't imagine a
sensible crosspost to sci.anthropology.paleo and comp.os.research, but I
wouldn't want to rule out the possibility a priori.
The evolution of the human species is naturally something of
considerable interest to a large number of people. At the moment the
quite frequent threads on this topic are split somewhat clumsily between
sci.bio, sci.anthropology and talk.origins, as well as several other
newsgroups. All three of these groups are fairly high volume, and are
certainly viable without this material; it is also expected that they
would share crossposts to sci.anthropology.paleo where appropriate (see
It seems likely that there are many people who are interested in human
evolution but are not particularly interested in natural history,
creationist controversy or social anthropology. (These are examples of
topics which make up a fair fraction of the volume in the three newsgroups
Mail votes to: usenet-votes at mathcs.emory.edu
(R)eplying to this message should address your vote correctly if
you are replying to this message in its originally posted form in
a newsgroup or mailing list, and your news reader or mail user
agent honors the Reply-To: header. Posted votes or votes mailed to
any other address do not count. Your mail message should contain
one and only one of the following statements:
I vote YES on sci.anthropology.paleo
I vote NO on sci.anthropology.paleo
Do NOT include this entire post, PLEASE, just the one line vote.
Anything else may be rejected by the automatic vote counting program.
Valid votes are YES, NO, ABSTAIN or CANCEL. Case is not important.
ABSTAIN votes do not affect the vote outcome.
If you change your mind, revote. Only the last vote will count.
You should receive a personal acknowledgment of your vote by email
within a few days. Invalid votes and bounced acknowledgments will
be identified in the second (the last) call for votes. Addresses
and votes of all voters will be published in the vote results. If
you wish to remove your vote and all indication that you have voted
from the final list, send a CANCEL vote.
Standard Guidelines for voting apply - one vote per person, etc...
100 more YES votes than NO votes and twice as many YES votes as NO
votes are required for group creation. For more information on the
group creation process, read news.announce.newusers and news.groups.
Jan Isley, the Knight who says ACK, can be reached at
jan at bagend.atl.ga.us or mathcs.emory.edu!bagend!jan