Photography - [Meta] *Poll Results* Proposed new, moderated digital photography group (rec.photo.digital.moderated)

Well, first of all, I'd like to thank you all for participating in the
poll, regardless of whether you voted in favour of it or against it. :)

I've finally gotten around to sorting through all the responses to the
poll & tallying it up.

In favour: (either as proposed, or subject to changes)
32 votes in the group, 6 via email.
Against:
15 votes in the group, 0 via email.

A total of 38 at least broadly in favour, (including 5 respondents
wanting changes to the initial proposal), vs 15 against.

That's a pretty good indicator that people are strongly in favour of a
cleaned-up version of RPD, & that it's worth our time & effort to get
the process started.
As soon as I have time, I'll write up a more formal proposal to be
discussed here. This version will also include changes based on peoples'
comments & questions during the poll, & on input I've received from
various experts on how to make the moderation system work quickly &
smoothly.

For those interested in checking my results, or verifying that I've
correctly tallied their opinion, I've added a summary of people's votes
to the end of this post. Please comment if you find any errors, or if
I've missed your vote.

-------------
From: Bay Area Dave
Message-ID: m
I vote for the status quo.
(Against)

From Fri Jun 18 14:49:59 2004
Message-ID:
I'm with "Dave".
(Against)

From: John McWilliams
Message-ID: hmvAc.48438$2i5.27103@attbi_s52
Since it won't change anything here - immediately at least, and not by
fiat, I say: What an offer, and thank you. What's to lose? Give it a go,
and if it doesn't have legs, nothing lost.... except your time, for
which: tia!
(In favour)

From: "Jack Pohler"
Message-ID:
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.248.194.231
Works for me.
(In favour)

From: Ron Hunter
Message-ID:
ONE opinion, with others completely repressed. No thanks.
(Against)

From Sat Jun 19 03:04:56 2004
Message-ID:
Against.
(Against)

From: (Richard Ballard)
Message-ID:
My Usenet experience leads me to prefer _not_ moderated newsgroups.
I tend to self-moderate through the use of killfiles in cases where
(after unhappy reading) I don't want to read another individual's
future messages.
(Against)

From Fri Jun 18 12:44:56 2004
Message-ID: . 4
I would support the new group. I would not support the linkage of RPD
and
the proposed RPDM via any crossposts or automatic posting mechanisms.
(In favour, if modified)

From: "Kimberlee"
Message-ID:
If it means the idiots would go away...I'm all for it!
(In favour)

From: Double D
Message-ID:
Hi Lionel. Echo that for me too. IFAP. :-)
Dick Drysdale
(In favour)

From Fri Jun 18 13:22:18 2004
Message-ID:
No.
(Against)

From: Nuk
Message-ID:
Can't see a problem with it...
(In favour)

From: "Daniel W. Rouse Jr."
Message-ID:
(b) Would you support or *vote for* the above proposal, with changes?
Depends on the changes.
(In favour, with changes)

From: David Dyer-Bennet
Message-ID:
(a) Would you support or *vote for* the above proposal, exactly as
stated?
I might very well. (I've just looked at it for the first time, and
who knows what people may bring up in discussion I haven't thought of
yet).
(In favour, with changes)

From: Thad
Message-ID:
Affirmative.
(In favour)

From: Andy Blanchard
Message-ID:
(b) Would you support or *vote for* the above proposal, with changes?
Yes. See above.
(In favour, with changes)

From: "Tony"
Message-ID:
I also post to RASTB5M (using my real email persona), and can support
everything said by Andy. I also agree with all of his suggestions below.
(In favour, with changes)

From: Charlie
Message-ID:
(a) Would you support or *vote for* the above proposal, exactly as
stated?
NO DOUBT!
(In favour)

From: (rs)
Message-ID:
Seems worth a try.
(In favour)

From: (Leroy Jolicoeur)
Message-ID:
Sounds very good. In favour.
(In favour)

From: Ron Hunter
Message-ID:
I will not take part in ANY moderated group. Past experience with them
has been totally unsatisfactory. Free exchange of ideas is suppressed
in the by moderators who allow only the 'party line', and contrary
opinions are simply not allowed to be seen.
(Against)

From: Bill
Message-ID:
Note me as "For" please.
(In favour)

From: (Orville Wright)
Message-ID:
You have my full support. In favor.
(In favour)

From: (Steven Scharf)
Message-ID:
A new group would be fine, we'll see if anyone posts to it though.
(In favour)

From: Richard Cockburn
Message-ID:
Thank you for articulating. Please change my vote to A: "in favor, as
proposed".
(In favour)

From: "Chuck"
Message-ID:
(B)
(In favour, with changes)

From: "Charles Schuler"
Message-ID:
My vote is yes.
(In favour)

From: "George"
Message-ID:
Getting to your question, I'd rather be in control of what I read vs.
having someone else decide for me. Put me down as a "no" on moderated.
(Against)

From: Roger Halstead
Message-ID:
(c) Would you *vote against* the above proposal?
Yes
(Against)

From: Charles
Message-ID:
I don't think this solution would fly. I think there would be
objections to automated cross posting like that. On several levels. I
for one would not want my posts to one newsgroup automaticly posted to
another.
(Against)

From: Adam
Message-ID:
I'll vote yes for the moderated group. Navigation has been getting
rather troublesome in here. :-(
(In favour)

From: "Tonci"
Message-ID:
(a) Would you support or *vote for* the above proposal, exactly as
stated?
yes
(In favour)

From: Jerry Shaw
Message-ID:
First, put me down for a "no."
(Against)

From: (ittsy)
Message-ID:
(b) Would you support or *vote for* the above proposal, with changes?
Yes
(In favour, with changes)

From: (WebKatz)
Message-ID:
Works for me, and since this is allegedly a poll, count me as
"Against." Thanks. BTW - what are the numbers so far?
(Against)

From: "Chris G"
Message-ID:
I vote absolutely NO. The best filter is my own head, I wish keep the
freedom to choose what to read or not read for myself.
(Against)

From: "Simone Wellington"
Message-ID:
Put me down for a yes as described.
(In favour)

From: lid
Message-ID:
Good plan.
(In favour)

From: Anders Svensson
Message-ID:
If it can really be done as you have explained it here, I am completely
in favour of your proposal.
(In favour)

From: (Paolo)
Message-ID:
(Yes) Would you support or *vote for* the above proposal, exactly as
stated?
(In favour)

From: (Mike)
Message-ID:
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(In favour)

From: (Jorge Prediguez)
Message-ID:
(a) Would you support or *vote for* the above proposal, exactly as
stated?
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!
(In favour)

From: Steve Wilbur
Message-ID:
Not me - we have enough problem with the govt censoring people. We
don't need petty tyrants on USENET to help out.
(Against)

From: Roger Halstead
Message-ID:
If I post to one group I'm going to complain if some one is cross
posting my posts to another group be it manually or by a bot.
(Against)

From: NoName
Message-ID:
(a) Would you support or *vote for* the above proposal, exactly as
stated?
Sure... it beats trying to weed through RPD. Go for it!
(In favour)

From: "Bernard Saper"
Message-ID:
YES!!!...Emphatically YES!!!
(In favour)

From: Dave Head
Message-ID:
I'd join a moderated digital photo group in a heartbeat.
(In favour)
-------------

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------