Re: 2nd CFV: comp.object.moderated moderated

[doylep@ecf.toronto.edu (Patrick Doyle)]

Just in case the massive crossposting got this ejected from your
newsreader...


In article <910744959.17155@isc.org>,
David Bostwick  <bostwick@cas.chemistry.gatech.edu> wrote:
>                      LAST CALL FOR VOTES (of 2)
>                moderated group comp.object.moderated
>
>Instructions for voting are just before the ballot itself.  Please read
>them before voting.  If you have questions about the voting process,
>ask the votetaker.
>
>This CFV is to be distributed only by the votetaker.  It is not to be
>posted to newsgroups, or mailed to mailing lists or individuals, except by
>the votetaker, and it is not to be placed on the World Wide Web.  Ballots
>or CFVs provided by anyone except the votetaker will be invalid.
>
>Newsgroups line:
>comp.object.moderated	A moderated forum for Object-oriented issues. (Moderated)
>
>Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC, 18 Nov 1998.
>
>This vote is being conducted by a neutral third party.  Questions
>about the proposed group should be directed to the proponent.
>
>Proponent: Tim Ottinger <ottinger@oma.com>
>
>Votetaker: David Bostwick <bostwick@cas.chemistry.gatech.edu>
>
>RATIONALE: comp.object.moderated
>
>Object-oriented programming has long ago graduated from a niche study
>to an industry force, so the discussion of things object-oriented has
>likewise increased in general interest and audience. This surge has
>increased the participation in comp.object so that it is difficult for
>participants to keep up with the volume.
>
>In addition, the comp.object newsgroup now receives a substantial
>number of inappropriate posts, much of which are of little value or
>interest to the community at large, and a large number of which are
>easily characterized as "flames" or "trolls".
>
>For those who would like to have a greater signal-to-noise ratio
>than is afforded in comp.object, we wish to create a second,
>separate newsgroup which is moderated to reduce the occurrance
>of spam, flames, trolls, and off-topic posts. In this way, the
>newsgroup will cater to professionals with less time for scanning the
>news, and those who wish to avoid flames.
>
>The moderators of comp.object.moderated were elected by a
>public, majority vote on comp.object and have produced a
>policy which they feel will encourage OO discussions and
>attract new readers and expert participants.
>
>Comp.object will not be moderated, though. It will remain as an
>alternative. On comp.object, one may have discussions on more
>tangential topics. Comp.object.moderated merely provides the
>readership with a well-focused, flame-free, spam-free choice.
>
>CHARTER: comp.object.moderated
>
>Comp.object.moderated is a moderated news group for discussion of
>issues directly related to Object-oriented theory and Object-oriented
>practice, and of general interest to the Object-oriented community.
>Any such articles are welcome, and are recommendations of alternative
>approaches in response to questions directly related to
>Object-oriented theory or practice.
>
>Moderation Policy:
>
>I PRINCIPLES
>
>Moderation is desired to attract and maintain participation by old
>posters, new posters, and especially expert posters. To do so,
>comp.object.moderated provides a non-threatening forum for discussing
>Object-oriented practice and theory. To attract and maintain a large
>professional readership this policy ensures that the forum is as
>concise and useful as it can possibly be.
>
>Here is what this moderation policy is intended to achieve with
>respect to each article:
>
>1) ON TOPIC
>2) NO FLAMES
>3) NO SPAM
>4) NO NONSENSE
>
>These goals are characterized as follows:
>
>1) ON TOPIC
>
>(Discussions of) the following subjects are regarded as being on topic
>in comp.object.moderated:
>
>a) the syntax and semantics of various Object-oriented languages, b)
>Object-oriented tricks and techniques, c) case studies, d) issues of
>software engineering related to Object-oriented, e) issues of software
>management related to Object-oriented, f) issue of design philosophy
>related to Object-oriented, g) design patterns related to
>Object-oriented, etc. h) Object-oriented analysis techniques. i)
>Object-oriented process. j) Object-oriented tools. k) Object-oriented
>Modeling. l) any and all other discussions relating or pertaining to
>Object- oriented techniques. m) management and policy of the
>newsgroup.
>
>Articles may be rejected as being off-topic if there are
>other, more specific newsgroups to which they belong.
>
>If an article references products like tools, libraries or
>platforms, it is still acceptable if the article just mentions
>these products as illustrations or examples and abstains from
>support questions.
>
>When in doubt:
>
>An article shall be accepted, especially for short off-topic
>digressions in a thread. In order to keep the noise level low, if such
>an article has already been accepted in recent days, the moderator
>body may decide to reject the newer one and refer the author to the
>earlier one.
>
>2) NO FLAMES
>
>a) No threats or attempts at intimidation are tolerated.  Those drive
>away audience. New posters are intimidated by it, and experts don't
>have the time or energy to waste on it. Such things are personal, and
>not of interest to the general Object-oriented audience.
>
>b) No disrespect towards others is tolerated. When people are unkind,
>new people will choose not to participate.  Personal feelings against
>one or another are not of interest to the general Object-oriented
>audience. People should read all ideas, and choose the ones that work
>for them, and a poor idea should be shown to be poor by technical or
>practical reasons.
>
>c) No disdainful or belittling articles are tolerated, no matter
>whether the contents of the article are otherwise correct or not.
>
>d) Questioning of other people's motives and honesty is explicitly
>considered both off-topic and extremely rude, no matter whether the
>contents of the article are otherwise correct or not.
>
>d) Any but the most light-hearted attempts at one-upmanship will be
>disallowed. Participation in a comp.object.moderated thread is not a
>contest with prizes for the winners.
>
>In essence, all attempts to hijack comp.object.moderated to wage a
>personal attack would not only be counter-productive, but also
>off-topic. When people speak against each other, they've lost focus on
>the issues at hand.
>
>When in doubt:
>
>An article is rejected. Not a flame shall pass through.
>
>3) NO NONSENSE
>
>a) FAQs aren't nonsense, but the repeated posting and answering of
>them is. Nobody wants to read the exact same questions and answers
>over and over. It's a burden on the reader that gates his productive
>use of the forum.
>
>b) Verbatim or slightly rephrased reposts are nonsense.
>c) Trolls are nonsense.
>d) Binaries are considered inappropriate in this newsgroup.
>
>In short, comp.object.moderated should be a forum you can read with
>the same confidence you have reading a manual or technical journal. It
>is an interactive professional forum, not a hobbyist board or a war
>board. It belongs to the community of people whose work is the
>practice and theory of Object-Orientation, and anything that turns the
>newsgroup away from that community, or turns the community away from
>the newsgroup, is not welcome.
>
>When in doubt:
>
>An article is accepted, general noise level permitting.
>
>4) NO SPAM
>
>The war on SPAM is the war to maintain control of the professional
>nature and the signal-to-noise ratio of a newsgroup.
>
>The Jargon File (http://sagan.earthspace.net/jargon) describes
>spam in the following terms:
>"...To cause a newsgroup to be flooded with irrelevant or
>inappropriate messages. [...] To send many identical
>or nearly-identical messages separately to a large number
>of Usenet newsgroups..."
>
>Whatever a moderator has to do to stop SPAM without rejecting
>legitimate posts is good. If stopping spam means blacklisting
>spam-posters, then so be it. If it involves building complex filtering
>rules, fine. If it is easily handled by rejecting posts, fine again.
>
>When in doubt:
>
>An article is rejected.
>
>II MEANS
>
>These goals are to be achieved as follows:
>
>1) Automated format checking
>
>If the posted article is not properly formatted (i.e. the news headers
>aren't right -- your news software should take care of this) or if the
>article is larger than 50KB, then it will be automatically rejected.
>The poster may or may not be notified of this kind of rejection,
>depending upon just how bad the headers were. Articles without Date:
>or Subject: headers are not properly formatted.
>
>2) Moderator Notes
>
>Moderators may add a note to an article only for the reasons and
>according to the policies stated above, to correct incomplete or
>incorrect references, or to recommend changing thread titles when
>topics drift from their original focus.
>
>The form of those notes will always be the same. They will composed of
>text in square brackets. The last four characters of the text in
>square brackets will be -mod. Thus:
>
>[text of the note. -mod].
>
>Moderators will be extremely conservative with their use of notes.
>Most articles should not have any notes. Those that do should have
>only one, or at the most two. So be judicious.
>
>3) Acceptance and Rejection Procedures
>
>Accepted articles are to be posted immediately.  When an article is
>rejected by a moderator, it will be emailed back to the poster. The
>subject of the email message will be: "Rejected, violates: [reason
>list]." where reason list is a comma separated list of the codes
>specified in the acceptance criteria above. e.g.  "Rejected, violates:
>[ON TOPIC, NO FLAMES c)]."
>
>The moderator should include moderator notes in the body of the
>article that explain why the article was rejected. The format of those
>notes should be as specified above, but they can be as brief or wordy
>as needed to get the point across. There also may be as many as
>needed.
>
>4) Moderator Anonymity
>
>Moderators act as a single body. Any rejection should be viewed as a
>rejection by the moderators and not by any particular moderator.  As
>such, the identity of the rejecting moderator will not be exposed to
>the poster whose article was rejected (i.e. the moderator's signature
>will be stripped). Any questions that the poster may have can be
>referred to the moderator's hotline email address.
>
>5) Appeal Policy
>
>Any poster of a rejected message may appeal that rejection to the
>moderators by emailing the article to the moderators' hotline. The
>moderators will review the rejection and either post or reject the
>article based upon their conclusion.
>
>6) Moderator Posting Policy
>
>Moderators are not allowed to moderate their own articles. No article
>written by a moderator will be posted unless one of the other
>moderators accepts it.
>
>7) Moderator Body
>
>The number of moderators shall not become less than five, so as to
>preserve the integrity of the appeal process.
>
>When there is a shortage of moderators, the remaining moderators
>select willing volunteers who are participants in the newsgroup and
>whose posting history shows understanding of and respect for the
>moderation policy.
>
>H) FAQ
>
>There will be a collection of answers to comp.object.moderated FAQs
>which is made publicly and freely available. The moderator body
>maintains, extends and publishes this FAQ document and points the
>comp.object.moderated readers to it as appropriate. The moderator body
>may decide to delegate this work.
>
>END CHARTER.
>
>MODERATOR INFO: comp.object.moderated
>
>Moderator: Patrick Logan <plogan@teleport.com>
>Moderator: Patrick Doyle <doylep@ecf.utoronto.ca>
>Moderator: Martijn Meijering <mmeijeri@wi.leidenuniv.nl>
>Moderator: John Goodsen <jgoodsen@saguarosoft.com>
>Moderator: Rolf Katzenberger <rfkat@ibm.net>
>Moderator: Yonat Sharon <yonat@usa.net>
>Administrative contact address: comp.object.maintainer@oma.com
>Article submission address: com.submit@oma.com
>
>END MODERATOR INFO.
>
>DISTRIBUTION:
>
>Pointers directing readers to this CFV will be posted in these groups:
>
>comp.object.logic
>comp.lang.c++
>comp.lang.clos
>comp.lang.forth
>comp.lang.java
>comp.lang.objective-c
>comp.lang.python
>comp.std.c++
>
>IMPORTANT VOTING PROCEDURE NOTES: READ THIS BEFORE VOTING
>
>Only one vote is allowed per person or per account.  Duplicate votes
>will be resolved in favor of the most recent valid vote.  Addresses and
>votes of all voters will be listed in the final voting results post.
>
>Votes must be mailed directly from the voter to the votetaker.  Anonymous,
>forwarded, or proxy votes are not valid.  Votes mailed by WWW/HTML/CGI
>forms are considered to be anonymous votes.
>
>The use of spam blockers or other munged addresses will prevent you from
>receiving an acknowledgement of your vote.  If the address cannot be
>verified, the ballot will be disallowed.
>
>Vote counting is automated, and failure to follow these directions may
>mean that your vote does not get counted.  If you do not receive an
>acknowledgment of your vote within three days contact the votetaker
>about the problem.  It is your responsibility to make sure your vote
>is registered correctly.
>
>The purpose of a Usenet vote is to determine the genuine interest of
>persons who would read a proposed newsgroup.  Soliciting votes from
>uninterested parties defeats this purpose.  Please do not distribute
>this CFV.  Instead, direct people to the official CFV as posted to
>news.announce.newgroups.  Distributing pre-marked or otherwise
>edited copies of this CFV is generally considered to be vote fraud.
>When in doubt, ask the votetaker.
>
>HOW TO VOTE:
>
>Extract the ballot from the CFV by deleting everything before the
>"BEGINNING OF BALLOT" and after the "END OF BALLOT" lines.  Don't worry
>about the spacing of the columns or any quote characters (">") that your
>reply inserts.  Please do not send the entire CFV back to me.
>
>Fill in the ballot as shown below.  Please provide a valid name and
>indicate your desired vote in the appropriate locations inside the ballot.
>
>When finished, MAIL the ballot to: <bostwick@cas.chemistry.gatech.edu>.
>Just "replying" to this message should work, but check the "To:" line.
>
>Examples of how to properly indicate your vote (do not vote here):
>
>  [ YES     ]  example.yes.vote
>  [ NO      ]  example.no.vote
>  [ ABSTAIN ]  example.abstention
>  [ CANCEL  ]  example.cancellation
>
>DO NOT modify, alter or delete any information in this ballot!
>If you do, the voting software will probably reject your ballot.
>
>If these instructions are unclear, please ask the votetaker.
>
>======== BEGINNING OF BALLOT: Delete everything before this line =======
>..-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>| Do not edit anything in this ballot, except to add your name and vote.
>|
>| 2ND CALL FOR VOTES: comp.object.moderated
>| Official Usenet Voting Ballot <COM-0002> (Do not remove this line!)
>|-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>| Please provide a valid name, or your vote may be rejected.  Place
>| ONLY your name (i.e., do not include your e-mail address or any other
>| information) after the colon on the line below.
>
>Voter name:
>
>| Insert YES, NO, ABSTAIN, or CANCEL inside the brackets for each
>| newsgroup listed below (do not delete the newsgroup name):
>
> Your Vote   Newsgroup
> ---------   -----------------------------------------------------------
>[         ]  comp.object.moderated
>
>======== END OF BALLOT: Delete everything after this line ==============
>
>This CFV was created with uvpq 1.0 (Aug 27 1997).
>PQ datestamp: 980322
>
>comp.object.moderated Bounce List - These ballots have been recorded
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>duncan@esatst.yc.estec.esa.nl                                    Duncan Gibson
>gregm_spam_bites@cc.gatech.edu                                 Greg Montgomery
>patrickl@servio.gemstone.com                                  Patrick D. Logan
>trimble@trimble.co.nz                                                Nick Mein


-- 
--
Patrick Doyle
doylep@ecf.toronto.edu