The call for votes (CFV) has been issued for the splinter group
"rec.woodworking.all-ages" proposed by Vito Kuhn
and Susan Welchel

Reference message ID is

Read the instructions in the CFV and follow them if you want your
ballot counted. Voting closes October 21 at 1 second to midnight UTC.

The CFV should appear in the following groups:

news.announce.newgroups
news.groups
free.uk.woodworking
rec.crafts.woodturning
rec.woodworking

but I don't see it here on the wreck yet.

I've submitted my ballot...

djb

In article .ca, Dave
Balderstone wrote:

I've submitted my ballot...

Unless the CFV also calls for eliminating rec.woodworking, I'm not too
worried about it.

In my article list, the CFV for rec.woodworking.all-ages appeared just
before your post, so there must be a bit of lag if you hadn't seen it
before posting.

In any case, I'm very amused by the idea that the proponents hope to
create a "family safe environment" in an unmoderated NG. "Unmoderated"
= "anyone can say whatever they wish".

Perhaps they just need to adopt my news reading methods for the wReck:
I "mark read" about 80%+ of the posts, because either they're OT by
subject line, or outside my areas of interest, or there have been more
than 10 replies, which means it's probably devolved into a "meaningless
brown cloud of poot", to quote Frank Zappa.

Kevin

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 23:04:09 -0600, Dave Balderstone
wrote:

The call for votes (CFV) has been issued for the splinter group
"rec.woodworking.all-ages" proposed by Vito Kuhn
and Susan Welchel

Reference message ID is

Read the instructions in the CFV and follow them if you want your
ballot counted. Voting closes October 21 at 1 second to midnight UTC.

The CFV should appear in the following groups:

news.announce.newgroups
news.groups
free.uk.woodworking
rec.crafts.woodturning
rec.woodworking

but I don't see it here on the wreck yet.

I've submitted my ballot...

djb



can you clarify the meaning of the different possible votes? it looks
like the possibilities a



[ YES ] example.yes.vote
[ NO ] example.no.vote
[ ABSTAIN ] example.abstention
[ CANCEL ] example.cancellation



thanks....

In article ,
wrote:
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 23:04:09 -0600, Dave Balderstone
wrote:

The call for votes (CFV) has been issued for the splinter group
"rec.woodworking.all-ages" proposed by Vito Kuhn
and Susan Welchel

Reference message ID is

Read the instructions in the CFV and follow them if you want your
ballot counted. Voting closes October 21 at 1 second to midnight UTC.

The CFV should appear in the following groups:

news.announce.newgroups
news.groups
free.uk.woodworking
rec.crafts.woodturning
rec.woodworking

but I don't see it here on the wreck yet.

I've submitted my ballot...

djb



can you clarify the meaning of the different possible votes? it looks
like the possibilities a



[ YES ] example.yes.vote
[ NO ] example.no.vote
[ ABSTAIN ] example.abstention
[ CANCEL ] example.cancellation


'YES' you are in favor of the new group being created
'NO' you are opposed to the new group being created
'CANCEL' to void a previously cast vote. (you can change your mind during
the voting period, only your _last_ vote counts. 'Cancel' is
how you withdraw a vote, =without= casting a vote for the opposite
side of the proposition)
'ABSTAIN' no functional purpose. it pretty much says "I'm going on the record
as 'I don't care' about this group."

The appropriate "magic word" must be inserted in the space marked off with the
'[' and ']' characters, in front of the name of each newsgroup on which you
are casting a vote.


If you think the proposed group may have an adverse effects on rec.woodworking
a 'no' vote is in order.

If you thing the proposed group has merit, in and of itself, then a 'yes' vote
is in order.

If you don't have any real feelings either way, then the recommended action is
_do_not_vote_ on the matter.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 23:04:09 -0600, Dave Balderstone
wrote:


can you clarify the meaning of the different possible votes? it looks
like the possibilities a



[ YES ] example.yes.vote
[ NO ] example.no.vote
[ ABSTAIN ] example.abstention
[ CANCEL ] example.cancellation


Ok this will sound mean but I believe the first 2 are self explanatory but
the last 2 are added for the benefit of Florida voters. ;~)

In article .ca, wrote:
The CFV should appear in the following groups:

news.announce.newgroups
news.groups
free.uk.woodworking
rec.crafts.woodturning
rec.woodworking

but I don't see it here on the wreck yet.

If you're using my TrollFilter, or Robert Bonomi's filters, you won't ever see
it on the Wreck because it's been crossposted to five groups. Our filters
remove such crossposts.


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.

In article , Kevin Craig
wrote:

In my article list, the CFV for rec.woodworking.all-ages appeared just
before your post, so there must be a bit of lag if you hadn't seen it
before posting.

I wonder if my host is filtering...

In article , Doug
Miller wrote:

If you're using my TrollFilter, or Robert Bonomi's filters, you won't ever
see
it on the Wreck because it's been crossposted to five groups. Our filters
remove such crossposts.

I'm not using your filters.

"Dave Balderstone" wrote in message

I'm not using your filters.

I don't see it either ... no filters, using Giganews.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 7/10/04

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 06:20:42 GMT, Kevin Craig
vaguely proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

How limited of you.....
Perhaps they just need to adopt my news reading methods for the wReck:
I "mark read" about 80%+ of the posts, because either they're OT by
subject line, or outside my areas of interest, or there have been more
than 10 replies, which means it's probably devolved into a "meaningless
brown cloud of poot", to quote Frank Zappa.

Kevin

************************************************** ***
I know I am wrong about just about everything. So I
am not going to listen when I am told I am wrong about
the things I know I am right about.

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 06:20:42 GMT, Kevin Craig wrote:
In article .ca, Dave
Balderstone wrote:

I've submitted my ballot...

Unless the CFV also calls for eliminating rec.woodworking, I'm not too
worried about it.

You don't have to eliminate a group to negatively change it. I'll be voting
no, mainly because the people proposing it have done _zero_ to explain
what they're up to, what their motivation really is, and so on.

In any case, I'm very amused by the idea that the proponents hope to
create a "family safe environment" in an unmoderated NG. "Unmoderated"
= "anyone can say whatever they wish".

Add "ineffective and unneeded" to my list of concerns, yes. No positive
effect, real potential of confusing people trying to get wooddorking
information, and an inevitable cross-posting "everything goes to both
groups" situation, proponents of unknown/dubious motivation.... I'm
not seeing _any_ upside to this.

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 13:22:20 GMT, Doug Miller wrote:

If you're using my TrollFilter, or Robert Bonomi's filters, you won't ever see
it on the Wreck because it's been crossposted to five groups. Our filters
remove such crossposts.

Explains why I didn't see it also. I killfile anything to 3 or more groups,
for the same reason. Need to go find it.

Thanks,
Dave Hinz

In article , Swingman
wrote:

I don't see it either ... no filters, using Giganews.

I'm using supernews, and don't see it (even in my list of killed posts)
but do see it on my cable ISP's feed.

Annoying.

Dave Hinz wrote:
Explains why I didn't see it also. I killfile anything to 3 or more groups,
for the same reason. Need to go find it.


I found it and voted.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN


http://www.mortimerschnerd.com

Dave Balderstone wrote in
tone.ca:

In article , Kevin Craig
wrote:

In my article list, the CFV for rec.woodworking.all-ages appeared just
before your post, so there must be a bit of lag if you hadn't seen it
before posting.

I wonder if my host is filtering...

CFV's are often cross-posted to all the relevant groups. Many
servers filter out all posts posted to more than one or two groups
(in order to eliminate troll posts, which are usually crossposted
to AUK, the nose, the flonk, etc etc).

Anyone interested who doesn't see the CFV should probably look
for it on Google groups.

John

wrote in news:lmanl0dmkv8fb2o3pv7uoer5mkk1k3n7q8@
4ax.com:

can you clarify the meaning of the different possible votes? it looks
like the possibilities a



[ YES ] example.yes.vote
[ NO ] example.no.vote
[ ABSTAIN ] example.abstention
[ CANCEL ] example.cancellation

The usually accepted meanings a

[YES] - I approve of this group and intend to read it
[NO] - I have some technical objection to the existance of the group
[ABSTAIN] - I have no objection to the group but also won't read it
[CANCEL] - I have previously voted and now wish to remove that vote

Note that "technical objection" can include such things as "I
beleive this group will adversely affect other groups" as well as
"I don't beleive this group will have a viable readership".

Note also that these meanings are slightly different from those
in Robert Bonomi's post. These are slightly more accurate, altho
those are close enough for practical purposes.

John

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 13:22:20 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:

In article .ca, wrote:
The CFV should appear in the following groups:

news.announce.newgroups
news.groups
free.uk.woodworking
rec.crafts.woodturning
rec.woodworking

but I don't see it here on the wreck yet.

If you're using my TrollFilter, or Robert Bonomi's filters, you won't ever see
it on the Wreck because it's been crossposted to five groups. Our filters
remove such crossposts.

I also don't see it, but I suspect that it is getting filtered because
I have Agent configured to skip crossposts. That means that if the
message has been retrieved in one group it will be skipped in any
subsequent groups it appears in. In this case I see it in news.groups,
but, because rec.woodworking is later in the subscribed groups list,
it is skipped here.

Either way I saw it and am casting my "no" vote.

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:26:10 -0600, Dave Balderstone wrote:

In article , Swingman
wrote:

I don't see it either ... no filters, using Giganews.

I'm using supernews, and don't see it (even in my list of killed posts)
but do see it on my cable ISP's feed.

Annoying.

For me it showed up as a reply to the 3rd RFD post. Mebbe check there.

--
Joe Wells

In article , Joe Wells
wrote:

For me it showed up as a reply to the 3rd RFD post. Mebbe check there.

I reset the group (supernews has over 100,000 posts to the wreck still
on their servers, BTW), disabled all my filters and sure enough, the
CFV showed up.

So supernews is off the hook.

djb

In article ,
John McCoy wrote:
wrote in news:lmanl0dmkv8fb2o3pv7uoer5mkk1k3n7q8@
4ax.com:

can you clarify the meaning of the different possible votes? it looks
like the possibilities a



[ YES ] example.yes.vote
[ NO ] example.no.vote
[ ABSTAIN ] example.abstention
[ CANCEL ] example.cancellation

The usually accepted meanings a

[YES] - I approve of this group and intend to read it
[NO] - I have some technical objection to the existance of the group
[ABSTAIN] - I have no objection to the group but also won't read it
[CANCEL] - I have previously voted and now wish to remove that vote

Note that "technical objection" can include such things as "I
beleive this group will adversely affect other groups" as well as
"I don't beleive this group will have a viable readership".

Note also that these meanings are slightly different from those
in Robert Bonomi's post. These are slightly more accurate, altho
those are close enough for practical purposes.

For some reason, I feel compelled to take (at least minor) issue with most of
the above. grin

Notably that a yes vote implies that you *do* intend to read the proposed group.

Over the years I have voted _for_ a number of groups that I had no intention
whatsoever of reading. Where there was a valid functional division being
drawn, and the new group was going to siphon off stuff that I had no interest
in. Creating that new group was going to get the 'irrelevancies' (to me) out
of the group that I _was_ reading -- a 'worthy' reason for creating it.

Since 'abstain' votes are, for all practical purposes, totally *ignored* by
the voting system, there is no functional difference between an 'abstain' vote
and _not_voting_.

The 'cancel' description, above, is a bit misleading in that it would seem to
imply that if you wish to change your vote from 'yes' to 'no', or vice-versa,
that you need to 'cancel' the your prior vote, and then submit your new one.

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 18:08:04 -0500, Joe Wells wrote:

For me it showed up as a reply to the 3rd RFD post. Mebbe check there.

It's not on my newsserver, but searched groups.google.com for
rec.woodworking.all-ages CFV and followed the instructions there. Worked
fine, got the ack shortly after I sent in my vote.

Dave Hinz

(Robert Bonomi) wrote in
rvers.com:

In article ,
John McCoy wrote:

The usually accepted meanings a

[YES] - I approve of this group and intend to read it
[NO] - I have some technical objection to the existance of the group
[ABSTAIN] - I have no objection to the group but also won't read it
[CANCEL] - I have previously voted and now wish to remove that vote

...

Notably that a yes vote implies that you *do* intend to read the
proposed group.

Over the years I have voted _for_ a number of groups that I had no
intention whatsoever of reading. Where there was a valid functional
division being drawn, and the new group was going to siphon off stuff
that I had no interest in. Creating that new group was going to get
the 'irrelevancies' (to me) out of the group that I _was_ reading -- a
'worthy' reason for creating it.

That misses the point of having a vote, however. The reason the vote
is held is so that the newsgroup administrators can determine if
there's enough potential users to justify creating a group. If the
group doesn't have enough users (readers & posters) it will die,
causing extra work for those maintaining newsservers (and probably
also failing to draw off your "irrelevancies" :-)

Which is why one's generally expected to vote yes only if they'll
at least read, if not post, the new group.

Of course, anyone's free to vote any way for any reason :-)

The 'cancel' description, above, is a bit misleading in that it would
seem to imply that if you wish to change your vote from 'yes' to 'no',
or vice-versa, that you need to 'cancel' the your prior vote, and then
submit your new one.

Yeah - getting it in one line was tricky. I was hoping that using
"remove" and not "replace" would get the point across that you only
need to use cancel if you don't want to have any vote entered.

John

Hi...
I've been lurking here for a few months and I see how everything here
works. However, I have one concern with the new group. If this
rec.woodworking.all-ages actually happens.. will rec.woodworking
become rec.woodworking.*? And if so, won't we be flooded with cross
posts from people who just want an answer about some basic thing and
are trying to post to as many groups as possible? I see that this
happens all the time in that kind of group (look at rec.antiques for
example.) Maybe this is an out of place post, or im misunderstanding
or or something, so if this is wrong, I apologize in advance

(braces himself for fire)

(a.t.) wrote in
om:

I have one concern with the new group. If this
rec.woodworking.all-ages actually happens.. will rec.woodworking
become rec.woodworking.*?

No. The wreck would remain the same, except possibly a few of the whiners
and prudes might not be here.

--
Bill

On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 15:45:53 -0700, a.t. wrote:

Hi...
I've been lurking here for a few months

Welcome to the Wonderful World of the WrecK!

and I see how everything here
works.

'Splain it to me sometime, willya?

However, I have one concern with the new group. If this
rec.woodworking.all-ages actually happens..

IMO, r.w.aa has a very, very (very) small chance of passing.

will rec.woodworking become
rec.woodworking.*?

No, the WrecK will be here, same bat-time, same bat-channel.

And if so, won't we be flooded with cross posts from
people who just want an answer about some basic thing and are trying to
post to as many groups as possible?

Pretty likely. So go vote No to r.w.aa if you're concerned about this.

I see that this happens all the time
in that kind of group (look at rec.antiques for example.)

Yup, I have that t-shirt too.

Maybe this is an
out of place post, or im misunderstanding or or something, so if this is
wrong, I apologize in advance

Nope, this is the right place to chat about a potential split of r.ww.

(braces himself for fire)

You *have* been paying attention. I'm impressed. ;^)

--
Joe Wells

On 1 Oct 2004 15:45:53 -0700, (a.t.)
wrote:

Hi...
I've been lurking here for a few months and I see how everything here
works. However, I have one concern with the new group. If this
rec.woodworking.all-ages actually happens.. will rec.woodworking
become rec.woodworking.*? And if so, won't we be flooded with cross
posts from people who just want an answer about some basic thing and
are trying to post to as many groups as possible? I see that this
happens all the time in that kind of group (look at rec.antiques for
example.) Maybe this is an out of place post, or im misunderstanding
or or something, so if this is wrong, I apologize in advance

(braces himself for fire)



you are correct. namespace pollution is one of the main objections.

In article , a.t.
wrote:

I've been lurking here for a few months and I see how everything here
works. However, I have one concern with the new group. If this
rec.woodworking.all-ages actually happens.. will rec.woodworking
become rec.woodworking.*?

No. rec.woodwoorking will not change.

And if so, won't we be flooded with cross
posts from people who just want an answer about some basic thing and
are trying to post to as many groups as possible? I see that this
happens all the time in that kind of group (look at rec.antiques for
example.)

I think that's certainly a possibility. I had a very short private
exchange with one of the proponents of the new group where I encouraged
them to pursue the moderated group with a better set of moderators. I
likely would have voted yes if that had gone to a vote. The current
proposal makes no sense to me, being unmoderated, and I don't
understand what color the sky is in the proponents' world.

Maybe this is an out of place post, or im misunderstanding
or or something, so if this is wrong, I apologize in advance

Not at all. This is a great place to discuss the issue.

On 1 Oct 2004 15:45:53 -0700, (a.t.) wrote:

Hi...
I've been lurking here for a few months and I see how everything here
works. However, I have one concern with the new group. If this
rec.woodworking.all-ages actually happens.. will rec.woodworking
become rec.woodworking.*?

Not sure what you mean by that

And if so, won't we be flooded with cross
posts from people who just want an answer about some basic thing and
are trying to post to as many groups as possible?

Ayup, very likely. Also likely that somebody with an idea will cross-post
to both groups as well (or worse, multi-post, resulting in duplicate,
redundant messages taking up additional space).

This is one of the reasons rec.ww has never split, there has yet been no
clear identification of a split hierarchy that would not result in multiple
posts, dilution of effectiveness, or efficiency of reading.

I see that this
happens all the time in that kind of group (look at rec.antiques for
example.) Maybe this is an out of place post, or im misunderstanding
or or something, so if this is wrong, I apologize in advance


Seems like you have a pretty good grasp of potential consequences.

(braces himself for fire)

In article 1096685252.C1t5VLwV5j0MUbXPnNrSnA@teranews, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

This is one of the reasons rec.ww has never split, there has yet been no
clear identification of a split hierarchy that would not result in multiple
posts, dilution of effectiveness, or efficiency of reading

Out of pure curiosity, does anyone know why the turning group ended up
in rec.crafts rather than rec?

Is there a puky duck factor at play?

On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 21:22:10 -0600, Dave Balderstone
wrote:

In article 1096685252.C1t5VLwV5j0MUbXPnNrSnA@teranews, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

This is one of the reasons rec.ww has never split, there has yet been no
clear identification of a split hierarchy that would not result in multiple
posts, dilution of effectiveness, or efficiency of reading

Out of pure curiosity, does anyone know why the turning group ended up
in rec.crafts rather than rec?


IIRC from the discussion leading to r.c.t's creation, rec.ww is kind of
grandfathered into its current position in the hierarchy. At some point,
the name space cabal realized there was a large proliferation of rec.*
groups and started further segregating them by interest, thus the
rec.crafts.* hieararchy. Thus when the turners' group was started, it was
placed in the crafts hierarchy to meet the new approach to classifying
groups. rec.woodworking retained its original position because to change
that would have had severe consequences in numerous places, for example, in
the archives, etc.

Is there a puky duck factor at play?

Don't think so. Anybody else have better memory retention than me on
this?

On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 21:22:11 -0700, Mark & Juanita
scribbled:

On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 21:22:10 -0600, Dave Balderstone
wrote:

In article 1096685252.C1t5VLwV5j0MUbXPnNrSnA@teranews, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

This is one of the reasons rec.ww has never split, there has yet been no
clear identification of a split hierarchy that would not result in multiple
posts, dilution of effectiveness, or efficiency of reading

Out of pure curiosity, does anyone know why the turning group ended up
in rec.crafts rather than rec?


IIRC from the discussion leading to r.c.t's creation, rec.ww is kind of
grandfathered into its current position in the hierarchy. At some point,
the name space cabal realized there was a large proliferation of rec.*
groups and started further segregating them by interest, thus the
rec.crafts.* hieararchy. Thus when the turners' group was started, it was
placed in the crafts hierarchy to meet the new approach to classifying
groups. rec.woodworking retained its original position because to change
that would have had severe consequences in numerous places, for example, in
the archives, etc.

Is there a puky duck factor at play?

Don't think so. Anybody else have better memory retention than me on
this?

I recall the same from when I started lurking on the wreck. See this
post by one of the proponents.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...40news1.i1.net

Luigi
Replace "nonet" with "yukonomics" for real email address
www.yukonomics.ca/wooddorking/antifaq.html
www.yukonomics.ca/wooddorking/humour.html

In article , Luigi Zanasi
wrote:

recall the same from when I started lurking on the wreck. See this
post by one of the proponents.

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...-1306962122220
001%40news1.i1.net

Luigi

Thanks for digging that out.

Ok.. Thanks to everyobdy who helped me figure this one out.
Also, thanks for the welcome. I hope to be able to participate in the
discussions here in the future.

-Drew