In article , Woodchuck Bill
wrote:

The proponent has been actively participating in the news.groups discussion
about the proposal..at least recently. He seems to be pretty serious. After
all, he did created a website for the proposed newsgroup. He posted it this
morning..

But still has not responded to questions about the qualifications of
the two proposed moderators, and has declined to identify an anonymous
"backup moderator".

That's the weakest part of the proposal right now, IMO. If noboody has
confidence in the moderators, why would they vote for the proposal?

While I'm not inherently opposed to a moderated group being established
(though I think it will rapidly fall flat on its face) if there are no
qualified moderators added to the RFD then I will vote "No" should it
actually come to a vote.

djb