Checksum: 42190
Lines: 50
Path: utzoo!sq!msb
From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader)
Date: Fri, 7-Apr-89 03:09:58 EDT
Message-ID: <1989Apr7.030958.11143@sq.com>
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Cabal
Summary: elect UNLAB
References: <3010@looking.UUCP> <63@norsat.UUCP> <288@ubbs-nh.MV.COM> <3031@looking.UUCP> <290@ubbs-nh.MV.COM> <291@ubbs-nh.MV.COM> <3230@ddsw1.MCS.COM> <14681@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US>
Reply-To: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader)
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto

> I'm all for _some_ collection of guidelines and Brad's seem workable,
> with a few changes such as the number of members. ...
> ... How about 15 or 20, selected from the larger sites.
>
> Perhaps a threshhold such as 10 or more newsfeeds would be
> required for a name to be placed into Brad's hat with some number of
> names drawn at random periodically from the hat.

Personally, I think 5 is just right, and the next best number would be 7,
because small even numbers are obviously undesirable.

But I *don't* think that drawing people's names at random is a good idea.
I think that *this* is the place where net voting is appropriate.  Yes, I'm
suggesting that representative government come to the net.  Well, "government"
in a limited sense, anyway... having only the power to control the newsgroup
namespace (and then only in comp, sci, and the other 5 top divisions; for
these purposes alt, bionet, biz, and suchlike are best considered as not
being part of "the net" at all).

I suggest that people suitably qualified to be on UNLAB should, if they
feel so inclined, volunteer their names in nomination; after a discussion
period someone should accept mailed votes; and the 5 winners form the initial
UNLAB for a fixed term of 6 months, after which the whole business repeats.
(Alternatively the terms could be staggered, but then we'd see election
campaigns more often.)  Something like 2 weeks for discussion and 2 for
voting seems right to me.  Yes, I'm aware that the "discussion period"
might consist of personality flames, but we'd get those anyway whether we
admitted to it in the plans or not.

I would say that anybody who has been reading the net for 2 or 3 years
should be considered "suitably qualified" to be on UNLAB, and anybody
who reads news.groups should be eligible to vote.  People who think that
UNLAB membership should be restricted to major news site admins, or the
like, should indicate this by voting only for such people.

But volunteering to be nominated is an important requirement.

Oh, one detail -- the form of the vote.  I would say that every voter
should have the chance to vote For or Against every candidate, rather
than the system of "vote for any N candidates where N is the number to
be elected".  (Note that people could abstain from voting on any particular
candidate.)  Then for each candidate the number Against is subtracted
from the number For, and the highest result wins.


-- 
Mark Brader, Toronto		"Common sense isn't any more common on Usenet
utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com	 than it is anywhere else."	-- Henry Spencer

This article is in the public domain.