Xref: utzoo news.groups:12231 news.misc:3586 Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ark1!dsill From: dsill@ark1.nswc.navy.mil (Dave Sill) Newsgroups: news.groups,news.misc Subject: New newsgroup creation Message-ID: <120@ark1.nswc.navy.mil> Date: 13 Sep 89 13:04:52 GMT Reply-To: dsill@relay.nswc.navy.mil (Dave Sill) Followup-To: news.misc Organization: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren, VA Lines: 132 Well, the ``Why vote "no"?'' thread on news.groups exceeded my expectations. I expected some hot discussion but no substantiation for the need for NO votes. As a result of several thoughtful follow-ups, I've changed my tune. I no longer think ignoring NO votes will fix the new group creation guidelines. This article contains my attempt at a better new group creation procedure. I thought about listing the various complaints with the current procedures, but we're all already familiar with them so I won't bore you. Instead, I'll present a first-cut at new procedures, discuss some of the advantages over the current procedures, and ask for your comments. First, we have to have some common idea of what the procedures are intended to accomplish. Ideally, before a new group is created we'd like to know that there is: 1) a real need for the group 2) consensus on the charter (purpose) and name of the group by its participants 3) consensus on the demonstration of 1 and the achievement of 2 by all. PROPOSED PROCEDURES 1. An interested party, called the initiator, posts a Trial Newsgroup Announcement to news.announce.newgroups and any other groups or mailing lists related to the proposed topic. Similar to the current Call for Discussion in content, its purpose is to inform potential participants of the formation of a trial newsgroup. A trial group exists within the misc group under the top-level category the initiator feels is appropriate for the topic. For example, the trial group for a technical/scientific agriculture group tentatively named sci.agriculture would be in sci.misc. The trial newsgroup has two purposes: discussion on topics as proposed in the charter and metadiscussion on the charter, name, and desirability of the new group. The Trial Newsgroup Announcement contains a first-cut name and charter for the proposed group, but both will be revised as necessary during the trial period. Articles posted to the trial group should contain a subject line of the form: Subject: subject of message [trial.group.name] This will distinguish traffic on the trial group from the normal traffic of the misc group. This distinction will allow the use of KILL files to exclude trial group traffic for nonparticipants and exclusion of non-trial-group traffic for participants. Guidelines should be developed for the formation of trial groups to prevent a proliferation of frivolous trial groups. E.g., a trial group may be in order when the volume of traffic on an existing group is high and there are obvious, natural subdivisions such as "hardware" and "software" in a comp.sys.foo group. 2. Since it's critical for establishing consensus that *all* issues raised during the trial period be addressed, a summary of the issues will be posted by the initiator after at least a one month trial period. For one week, users will be able to review the issues and post any omissions. The initiator will then post a Metadiscussion Survey which requests all trial newsgroup participants to vote on each issue. After two weeks for the collection of responses the results are tallied. A simple majority, greater than half of all responses, establishes consensus. Unresolved issues, if any, are debated until the initiator feels an Issue Survey is warranted. Issue Surveys are like Metadiscussion Surveys except they only concern one issue. Mandatory issues for every Metadiscussion Survey include: -the desirability of the new group -the name and charter of the new group -moderation status of the new group 3. Once all issues raised during the trial period have been resolved, the initiator posts a Call for Approval for the proposed group to the same newsgroups that the Trial Newsgroup Announcement was posted to. Included in the CFA is the approved charter and name of the group, a summary of the issues and resolutions, and a list of the trial group's participants. Parallel to the current Call for Votes, the Call for Approval presents evidence of the consensus of the participants on the name and charter (via the summary of issues) and evidence of the need for the group (via the list of participants). Users are requested to either approve or disapprove of the creation of the proposed group. Replies are collected for two weeks. A minimum of 100 total replies and a 2/3 majority in favor should result in the acceptance of the proposal and the creation of the new group. ANALYSIS 1. Does it meet the needs? Recapping our original requirements: 1) [Demonstrating] a real need for the group This is accomplished by the success of the trial group, or not accomplished if it fails. If a simple majority of trial participants don't agree it's a good idea, then it's not a good idea. If you only get ten trial participants, you're not ready for your own group. 2) Consensus on the charter (purpose) and name of the group by its participants This is also accomplished during the trial period. 3) Consensus on the demonstration of 1 and the achievement of 2 by all. This is accomplished by the Call for Approval. 2. What are the advantages over the current procedures? -allows instant formation of a new group without actually creating a new group -requires consensus on all issues including name, charter, and the need for the group by its participants -allows and requires participants to demonstrate that they have a viable group -allows a new group to define its charter on-the-fly -NO votes are retained, forestalling anarchy DISCUSSION So, what do you think? I'm sure there will be opinions on both sides, and even if most people approve of the concept it will still require some tweaking. What's right with it? What's wrong? Speak your mind! Follow-up, don't reply, so we can all hear what you have to say. Note that follow-ups are directed to news.misc. -- Dave Sill (dsill@relay.nswc.navy.mil)