Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!uunet!yale!cmcl2!ccnysci!dan
From: dan@ccnysci.UUCP (Dan Schlitt)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Scrap the current NG creation procedure, invent a new one
Keywords: newgroup, vote, control
Message-ID: <1490@ccnysci.UUCP>
Date: 4 Apr 89 13:29:40 GMT
References: <3010@looking.UUCP> <63@norsat.UUCP> <288@ubbs-nh.MV.COM> <3031@looking.UUCP>
Reply-To: dan@ccnysci.UUCP (Dan Schlitt)
Organization: City College Of New York
Lines: 55

In article <3031@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:
>In article <288@ubbs-nh.MV.COM> noel@ubbs-nh.MV.COM (Noel Del More) writes:
>>Brad:
>>	[some unnecessary public flaming deleted]

>
>Thank you for your kind note.  As I have seen this sentiment expressed by
>one or two others, perhaps more politely, I feel I should explain what is
>an important issue here.
>
>I am tired of a USENET where things are decided by who can shout down the
>other side the loudest.  A USENET where you don't do things for fear that
>the I-should-run-the-net people will insult and flame you.
>
>I DO things on USENET, I don't just talk about them.  I believe that the
>things I do make a better net, and I make efforts to find out whether 
>the things I do are supported by the wider net.  I believe they are, and
>unlike the rest of you, I have evidence for it.
>

You are not the only person who can carry this burden.  In fact,
several of them were trying to resolve this particular question and
probably would have done quite well without your "help".

>The group creation mess is an important issue to me, and I refuse to not
>put forward my careful proposal just because some people recently decided
>to go after me.   

As a news administrator or don't see the awful mess that some see.
Some news groups get created and some don't.  The number is not
overwhelming.  The controversy about some of the groups would occur
under any system of group creation.  The willingness of folk to go
along with what happened might be a lot less under systems different
than those currently being used.

>-- 
>Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd.  --  Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473

The idea that a small transient group making arbitrary decisions would
be preferable to the present rules boggles the mind.  Unless the pool
from which this select group is drawn are of extremely uniform opinion
(on usenet?  Surely you jest!) there will be no consistency in the
decisions.  This will certainly lead to controversy that will make
past events look like tranquility itself.

The present rules are easy to understand and the way that the result
is determined is public and definitive.  Those are essentials for any
decision process for a blob as amorphous as the net.  Endless
explainations from 5 people (or 10 or 20) about why they decide to
create or not create a group is not simple, public, or definitive.
-- 
Dan Schlitt                        Manager, Science Division Computer Facility
dan@ccnysci                        City College of New York
dan@ccnysci.bitnet                 New York, NY 10031
                                   (212)690-6868