Questions for Steve Young (Usenet Voting Procedures)

Questions Steve, regarding Lionel's moderation proposal.

When a CFV for a new newsgroup proposal is officially voted upon, is it true that the voters need to use real ISP email addresses?

What constitutes a real ISP address?

What about ISPs that do not include email for free?

How could those people vote?

Would paid users of web e-mail accounts be accepted for voting?

Will rec.photo* parcipants have exclusive voting rights?

What mechanisms are in place to prevent trouble makers from other groups vote just to screw things up, as long as they have a "valid" email address?

What would prevent a person from getting all of his friends to proxy vote for him with the email addresses?

Example-an activist college student gets his 100 frat brothers to vote on his behalf.



IMPORTANT QUESTION. IS IT TRUE THAT AFTER A CFV VOTE, THE REAL EMAIL ADDRESSES OF ALL

VOTERS WILL BE POSTED, AND WITHOUT ANY MUNGE FACTOR? THIS MIGHT DETER SOME PRIVACY/ANTI-

SPAM ADVOCATES FROM VOTING.

"Keith Borland" wrote

Questions Steve, regarding Lionel's moderation proposal.

Wee you ask some serious questions Keith. I'm not an authority on this by any
means. Infact, I was reading the RGPM voting postmortem last night and there
were several voting examples discussed where I may have been a little general in
words I've used here previously and therefore, possibly misleading. I will
answer your questions mostly from this recent discussion on news.groups and
relevant voting FAQs.

Message-ID:
From: "David E. Smith"
Newsgroups:
news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,alt.vacation.l as-vegas,
rec.gambling.poker,rec.gambling.blackjack
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 10:54 AM
Subject: RESULT: rec.gambling.poker.moderated moderated fails 228:148

Yes folks, it *failed*, it had only 228 yes votes and a whopping 148 no votes.

When a CFV for a new newsgroup proposal is officially voted upon, is it true
that the voters need to use real ISP email addresses?
What constitutes a real ISP address?
What about ISPs that do not include email for free?
How could those people vote?

The answer to this has now become no, see Russ Allbery's text below

Any *non anon* email that accepts the return acknowledgement will work.
Bounced acknowledgements invalidate the vote.

Would paid users of web e-mail accounts be accepted for voting?

Yes, as long as they can receive the acknowledgement

Will rec.photo* parcipants have exclusive voting rights?

No It is open to any Tom, Dick or Suzy, anywhere. You do have to use the
official CFV form, which is only available at the listed newsgroups. In this
case, there would be one posted to this group, I would guess. It's a matter of
copying and pasting it to your email program. Instructions are clear, but it may
be a bit tedious for a newbie.

What mechanisms are in place to prevent trouble makers from other groups vote
just to screw things up, as long as they have a "valid" email address?

None They have the same rights as any long time group user.
But if they are a 'NO' voter, they are twice as big.

What would prevent a person from getting all of his friends to proxy vote for
him with the email addresses?

Nothing but an individual's personal integrity

Example-an activist college student gets his 100 frat brothers to vote on his
behalf.

They can not be anonymous and if they are a nym handle, you would have to be
able demonstrate posting use. That's providing the vote taker looks, but if they
look like real names 100 different valid email accounts with 100 ?real?
names and you're in there. These words from Russ Allbery:

Message-ID:
In news.groups, The Beet Man writes:
That's the same guy who posted a solicitation of votes to rec.hunting.
How is 4 votes from the same ISP and presumably IP address not
considered vote fraud?

"Russ Allbery" wrote
How is it vote fraud? Do you think there's a rule saying only one vote
per IP address, or only one vote per ISP?

Or if this vote comes up again, is it ok for me to create as many
accounts as I want for the beetman family?

Provided that you create corresponding family members who want to vote at
an equivalent rate, sure. I don't know how fast beets grow, but you may
want to get right on that.
-------------------------------------

IMPORTANT QUESTION. IS IT TRUE THAT AFTER A CFV VOTE, THE REAL
EMAIL ADDRESSES OF ALL VOTERS WILL BE POSTED, AND WITHOUT
ANY MUNGE FACTOR? THIS MIGHT DETER SOME PRIVACY/ANTI-
SPAM ADVOCATES FROM VOTING.

Yes they do list all votes with email address and how you voted. Here is how
they listed them this time. I chose Rich M, because he was the proponent.
They only munged out the @

In the yes category:

rich~holdemsecrets.com Rich M

Hope you find this useful Keith

Steve Young

"Steve Young" wrote in message
...
SNIP
Subject: RESULT: rec.gambling.poker.moderated moderated fails 228:148

Yes folks, it *failed*, it had only 228 yes votes and a whopping 148 no
votes.

Which relates to this newsgroup, HOW?

Bart

"Bart van der Wolf" wrote in message
...

"Steve Young" wrote in message
...
SNIP
Subject: RESULT: rec.gambling.poker.moderated moderated fails 228:148

Yes folks, it *failed*, it had only 228 yes votes and a whopping 148 no
votes.

Which relates to this newsgroup, HOW?

one has to climb over a 2 to 1 handicap, no matter which group.
try that in golf grin















Bart

In article , Bart van der
Wolf wrote:

Which relates to this newsgroup, HOW?

It doesn't relate much except that it shows that you have to get enough
support for a proposal to pass. A simple majority is not enough.
Rec.gambling.poker.moderated failed for reasons that in my opinion
probably would not apply to a rec.photo.digital.moderated. The
proponant came out of nowhere and was not considered a newsgroup
regular by many. There were all kinds of suspicions among the existing
poker newsgroup, whether justified or not, about the motives behind
that proposal.

--
Charles

In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Steve Young wrote:
"Bart van der Wolf" wrote in message
...

"Steve Young" wrote in message
...
SNIP
Subject: RESULT: rec.gambling.poker.moderated moderated fails 228:148

Yes folks, it *failed*, it had only 228 yes votes and a whopping 148 no
votes.

Which relates to this newsgroup, HOW?

one has to climb over a 2 to 1 handicap, no matter which group.
try that in golf grin


It still has utterly no relevance to rec.photo.equipment.35mm. How many
times do you have to be told "get lost" before you get it?

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

"Steve Young" wrote in message
Yes folks, it *failed*, it had only 228 yes votes and a whopping
148 no votes.

"Bart van der Wolf" wrote
Which relates to this newsgroup, HOW?

Steve Young wrote
one has to climb over a 2 to 1 handicap, no matter which group.
try that in golf grin

"Sander Vesik" wrote
It still has utterly no relevance to rec.photo.equipment.35mm. How many
times do you have to be told "get lost" before you get it?

oh? you hadn't heard you're next? (below) Best bone up on the regs

From: "Lionel"
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 9:36 PM
Subject: [Meta] POLL: Who here would support a moderated version of
rec.photo.digital?

snipped the pitch

If people are generally in favour of this idea, it might be worth making
a similar proposal for RPE35mm, given that they have a lot of the same
problems we're suffering from.
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

Kibo informs me that "Keith Borland" stated
that:

Questions Steve, regarding Lionel's moderation proposal.

Well, I hope you don't mind me throwing in answers as well, as I believe
that Steve's agenda is rather different to those of the /photographers/
who post here.

As for the general procedures involved in creating new newsgroups & the
voting, you can find the full, offical details at the FAQ on Russ
Allbery's website:
http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html
Most of your questions about the voting procedure are answered on that
page.

When a CFV for a new newsgroup proposal is officially voted upon, is it true that the voters need to use real ISP email addresses?

No. The address just needs to be able to receive email.

What constitutes a real ISP address?

See above.

What about ISPs that do not include email for free?

See above.

How could those people vote?

See above.

Would paid users of web e-mail accounts be accepted for voting?

Yes.

Will rec.photo* parcipants have exclusive voting rights?

No. Anybody who wants to participate can.

What mechanisms are in place to prevent trouble makers from other groups vote just to screw things up, as long as they have a "valid" email address?

Not a thing, unfortunately.

What would prevent a person from getting all of his friends to proxy vote for him with the email addresses?

See above.

Example-an activist college student gets his 100 frat brothers to vote on his behalf.

Yep, they could do that. Of course, there's nothing to stop the other
side from doing the same thing.

IMPORTANT QUESTION. IS IT TRUE THAT AFTER A CFV VOTE, THE REAL EMAIL ADDRESSES OF ALL
VOTERS WILL BE POSTED, AND WITHOUT ANY MUNGE FACTOR? THIS MIGHT DETER SOME PRIVACY/ANTI-
SPAM ADVOCATES FROM VOTING.

It isn't true. The list of names & addresses has the '@' sign replaced
with a '~' to deter automated address harvesting.

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

"Lionel" wrote in message
...
Kibo informs me that "Keith Borland" stated
that:

Questions Steve, regarding Lionel's moderation proposal.

Well, I hope you don't mind me throwing in answers as well, as I believe
that Steve's agenda is rather different to those of the /photographers/
who post here.

that's perdy funny, when all your answers are the same as mine were

As for the general procedures involved in creating new newsgroups & the
voting, you can find the full, offical details at the FAQ on Russ
Allbery's website:

I remember reading about Russ He can be pretty funny when he talks about
beets

http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html
Most of your questions about the voting procedure are answered on that
page.

I'm not commenting any further, because this is exactly what I said,
though I'll meet you at the bottom

When a CFV for a new newsgroup proposal is officially voted upon, is it true
that the voters need to use real ISP email addresses?

No. The address just needs to be able to receive email.

What constitutes a real ISP address?

See above.

What about ISPs that do not include email for free?

See above.

How could those people vote?

See above.

Would paid users of web e-mail accounts be accepted for voting?

Yes.

Will rec.photo* parcipants have exclusive voting rights?

No. Anybody who wants to participate can.

What mechanisms are in place to prevent trouble makers from other groups vote
just to screw things up, as long as they have a "valid" email address?

Not a thing, unfortunately.

What would prevent a person from getting all of his friends to proxy vote
for him with the email addresses?

See above.

Example-an activist college student gets his 100 frat brothers to vote on his
behalf.

Yep, they could do that. Of course, there's nothing to stop the other
side from doing the same thing.

go! go! go! you'll need twice as big! and 'yes' often takes an interested,
understanding conviction.

IMPORTANT QUESTION. IS IT TRUE THAT AFTER A CFV VOTE, THE REAL
EMAIL ADDRESSES OF ALL VOTERS WILL BE POSTED, AND WITHOUT
ANY MUNGE FACTOR? THIS MIGHT DETER SOME PRIVACY/ANTI-
SPAM ADVOCATES FROM VOTING.

It isn't true. The list of names & addresses has the '@' sign replaced
with a '~' to deter automated address harvesting.

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

up perdy early, aren't ya Lionel?
(you'll be thankful for the head start)

Steve Young

Kibo informs me that "Steve Young" stated
that:

"Lionel" wrote in message
.. .
Kibo informs me that "Keith Borland" stated
that:

Questions Steve, regarding Lionel's moderation proposal.

Well, I hope you don't mind me throwing in answers as well, as I believe
that Steve's agenda is rather different to those of the /photographers/
who post here.

that's perdy funny, when all your answers are the same as mine were

Similar, certainly. But it's all in the spin, of course.

As for the general procedures involved in creating new newsgroups & the
voting, you can find the full, offical details at the FAQ on Russ
Allbery's website:

I remember reading about Russ He can be pretty funny when he talks about
beets

I've known Russ for years, & he's usually pretty entertaining.

Yep, they could do that. Of course, there's nothing to stop the other
side from doing the same thing.

go! go! go! you'll need twice as big! and 'yes' often takes an interested,
understanding conviction.

Indeed. I've already made one big mistake, which was to phrase the poll
subject-line poorly, which made it look like I was proposing the
moderation of RPD, rather than the creation of a new, moderated group.

up perdy early, aren't ya Lionel?

Yep. I promised my girlfriend a ride into work this morning.

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