26 May 2005: Change to election system for moderators of newsgroup uk.gay-lesbian-bi
From: Barry Salter <barry@blackhole.southie.me.uk>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 21:01:15 +0100
Subject: RESULT - Change to election system for moderators of newsgroup uk.gay-lesbian-bi - All proposals FAIL
Newsgroups: uk.net.news.announce,uk.net.news.config,uk.gay-lesbian-bi
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
RESULT - Change to election system for moderators of newsgroup uk.gay-lesbian-bi
Summary of results:
Proposal A - Change Maximum Number of Moderators
Stage 1 - Comparison of Options to Status Quo
Option A preferred to Status Quo by 10 votes to 2
Option B preferred to Status Quo by 9 votes to 1
Status Quo preferred to Option C by 6 votes to 2
Status Quo preferred to Re-Open Discussion by 5 votes to 4
None of the options beat Status Quo by 12 votes or more, therefore the
proposal FAILS and Stage 2 (comparison of remaining options) is not
necessary.
Proposal B - Change Voting Method (Simple Yes/No for all candidates)
YES = 10 votes
NO = 2 votes
YES beat NO by a majority of 8 votes. This is less than the +12 majority
required to beat the Status Quo. Accordingly, the proposal FAILS.
Proposal C - Change Voting Method (Where there are more candidates than
vacancies)
Stage 1 - Comparison of Options to Status Quo
Option A preferred to Status Quo by 11 votes to 1
Option B preferred to Status Quo by 8 votes to 3
Status Quo preferred to Re-Open Discussion by 8 votes to 2
None of the options beat Status Quo by 12 votes or more, therefore the
proposal FAILS and Stage 2 (comparison of remaining options) is not
necessary.
Proposal D - Limit to Number of Consecutive Terms Served
YES = 7 votes
NO = 4 votes
ABSTAIN = 1 vote
YES beat NO by a majority of 3 votes. This is less than the +12 majority
required to beat the Status Quo. Accordingly, the proposal FAILS.
========================================================================
Voting closed at 23:59:59 BST, 20th May 2005
Proponent: Neil Matthews <neil (at) chaos (dot) org (dot) uk>
Votetaker: Barry Salter <bsalter (at) ukvoting (dot) org (dot) uk>
As per usual UKVoting practice, all addresses in these Results are
munged, to reduce the likelihood of address harvesting, be it by
spambots or virus-infected machines.
========================================================================
Distribution:
These results have been posted to the following newsgroups:
uk.net.news.announce
uk.net.news.config
uk.gay-lesbian-bi
========================================================================
The Results:
The results follow below in the following order:
1) Results
2) Particulars of the Vote
3) Votetakers Comments
4) Voting and Appeal Guidelines
5) Rationale & Proposed Changes
6) Newsgroups Line
7) Amended Charter
========================================================================
Results:
To make formatting simpler, and also to reduce the overall length of
this post, the results for Proposals B and D are given first, followed
by those for Proposals A and C.
Proposal D ----\
Proposal B ---\|
Voter Name E-Mail Address ||
Bryan news$heian$org$uk YY
Dale abuse$webeye$freeserve$co$uk YY
David Boothroyd david$election$demon$co$uk YN
JohnM john$scroll$demon$co$uk YY
Jon H jon$serf$org YY
Lyn David Thomas lyn$trebute$fsnet$co$uk NY
mark MarrkN19$aol$com YN
Neil Matthews neil$chaos$org$uk NY
Niles alex$foster$zetnet$co$uk YN
paul {voter}$watman$clara$co$uk YN
PaulG notion$paddington$org$uk YY
robert marshall robert$chezmarshall$freeserve$co$uk YA
==============================
Proposal A - Change Maximum Number of Moderators
RAW PREFERENCES GRID
A B C ROD SQ
Option A [n/a] [ 8] [ 10] [ 12] [ 10]
Option B [ 4] [n/a] [ 8] [ 8] [ 9]
Option C [ 2] [ 2] [n/a] [ 5] [ 2]
ROD [ 0] [ 2] [ 3] [n/a] [ 4]
Status Quo [ 2] [ 1] [ 6] [ 5] [n/a]
In this grid, each number represents the number of votes which were cast
that preferred the option named in the number's row to the option
appropriate to the number's column. For instance, 8 votes preferred
Option A (Maximum of 8 Moderators) to Option B (Maximum of 10 Mods)
while 2 votes preferred the Status Quo to Option A (Maximum of 8 Mods).
PARTICULARS OF THE VOTE
Status Quo -------\
Re-Open Discussion ------\|
Option C -----\||
Option B ----\|||
Option A ---\||||
Voter Name ||||| Preference
Bryan 31452 B > SQ > A > C > ROD
Dale 12453 A > B > SQ > C > ROD
David Boothroyd 43152 C > SQ > B > A > ROD
JohnM 1AAAA A > B = C = ROD = SQ
Jon H 21AAA B > A > C = ROD = SQ
Lyn David Thomas 13A2A A > ROD > B > C = SQ
mark 12534 A > B > ROD > SQ > C
Neil Matthews 12453 A > B > SQ > C > ROD
Niles 23145 C > A > B > ROD > SQ
paul 13524 A > ROD > B > SQ > C
PaulG 21AA3 B > A > SQ > C = ROD
robert marshall 1AAAA A > B = C = ROD = SQ
Notes: A = Option not ranked, AAAAA = Abstain
==============================
Proposal C - Change Voting Method (Where there are more candidates than
vacancies)
RAW PREFERENCES GRID
A B ROD SQ
Option A [n/a] [ 9] [ 11] [ 11]
Option B [ 2] [n/a] [ 8] [ 8]
ROD [ 0] [ 2] [n/a] [ 2]
Status Quo [ 1] [ 3] [ 8] [n/a]
In this grid, each number represents the number of votes which were cast
that preferred the option named in the number's row to the option
appropriate to the number's column. For instance, 9 votes preferred
Option A (Voting by Simple Yes/No unless more candidates than vacancies)
to Option B (Simple Yes/No, order of election determined by vote
difference) while 1 vote preferred the Status Quo to Option A (Voting by
Simple Yes/No unless more candidates than vacancies).
PARTICULARS OF THE VOTE
Status Quo ------\
Re-Open Discussion -----\|
Option B ----\||
Option A ---\|||
||||
Voter Name |||| Preference
Bryan 1243 A > B > SQ > ROD
Dale 2143 B > A > SQ > ROD
David Boothroyd 1432 A > SQ > ROD > B
JohnM 1AAA A > B = ROD = SQ
Jon H 12AA A > B > ROD = SQ
Lyn David Thomas 1423 A > ROD > SQ > B
mark 1243 A > B > SQ > ROD
Neil Matthews 1243 A > B > SQ > ROD
Niles 1243 A > B > SQ > ROD
paul 2134 B > A > ROD > SQ
PaulG 12A3 A > B > ROD > SQ
robert marshall AAA1 SQ > A = B = ROD
Notes: A = Option not ranked, AAAA = Abstain
========================================================================
Votetakers Comments:
Not a lot to say really. This vote had one of the lowest turnouts in
recent uk.* history, which is rather a shame, and most people managed to
follow the voting instructions properly.
There was, however, one person who put YES as his only preference for
the two proposals being counted under the Condorcet system, despite the
voting instructions, and the "clues" on the ballot paper, and another
voter sent an HTML copy of his vote, which managed to "break" the script
I use for initial validation.
There was also a small incident during the latter half of the vote, when
I was testing a revised script and it decided to send a new ack to all
of the existing voters telling them that their vote had been deemed to
be invalid, for which I swiftly issued an apology.
You'll notice that, despite none of the proposals having passed, there
is still a revised charter at the end of this posting. This is merely to
effect the change to Clause 3.xi mentioned in the original proposal as
being independent of whether Proposal D passed.
For the avoidance of doubt, the control message that made the group
moderated was issued on the 28th of April 1999, therefore the Moderator
Elections SHOULD take place at the end of March each year.
========================================================================
This vote was conducted by a neutral third party member of UKVoting.
UKVoting is a group of independent votetakers who count votes on CFVs in
the uk hierarchy. The rules under which this vote is taken are posted
regularly to uk.net.news.announce or can be found at the following URL:
<ftp://src.doc.ic.ac.uk/usenet/news-info/news.answers/uk/voting>
The UKVoting web pages can be found at <http://www.ukvoting.org.uk/>
There is a five day discussion period after these results are posted to
uk.net.news.announce.
Allegations of irregularity should be sent to control(at)usenet.org.uk.
========================================================================
Rationale:
When the group originally became moderated, it was agreed that the size
of the moderation panel would be between four and twelve people. It was
also agreed that the annual election of moderators would be by the
Single Transferable Vote (STV) system. In the years since moderation
commenced, there have never been more than 12 candidates and therefore
the elections have been considered to be a foregone conclusion, despite
the inclusion of the Re-open Nominations (RON) option on the ballot. STV
votes involve the vote-taker in significant extra work and where the
number of candidates is less than the number of positions available,
it's value is limited. This proposed charter change seeks to make the
voting system more sensible. Although most moderators have informally
and voluntarily chosen to take a year out after after a number of
consecutive years in post, there is no formal requirement for them to do
so. While some continuity is desirable from year to year, concern has
been expressed about 'perpetual' moderators. The proposal of a maximum
of three consecutive terms seeks to address this concern.
The proposed changes are as follows:
The maximum number of moderators is reduced from 12 to 8
If the number of candidates is 8 or less the vote is conducted on
the basis of a single Yes/No vote for each candidate.
Any candidate receiving more Yes votes than No votes will be deemed
elected. Candidates with more No votes than Yes votes or equal
numbers of Yes and No votes will be deemed not elected.
If the number of candidates exceeds 8, the vote is conducted by the
current STV system.
No moderator may hold the position for more than 3 consecutive
years. Following 3 years of tenure, the moderator must retire for a
year before again becoming eligible for election. The exception to
this would be that if the number of moderators falls below the
minimum required, it would be permissible for the remaining
moderators to co-opt a person in their retirement year following 3
consecutive years of service. Part years served as a co-opted
moderator do not count towards the "3 consecutive years" period. So
an individual co-opted part way through a moderation year, could
then go on to be elected for 3 consecutive terms before being
required to retire. However, if a moderator should be co-opted
during his "retirement" year he will not be eligible for re-election
until he has had a full year of retirement.
========================================================================
Proposed Charter Modifications:
Proposal A - Change Maximum Number of Moderators
Option A: Maximum of 8 Moderators
Under the heading "Moderation Panel", replace clause 1
1 There shall be a panel of not less than 4 and not more than 12
moderators.
with
1 There shall be a panel of not less than 4 and not more than 8
moderators.
Option B: Maximum of 10 Moderators
Under the heading "Moderation Panel", replace clause 1
1 There shall be a panel of not less than 4 and not more than 12
moderators.
with
1 There shall be a panel of not less than 4 and not more than 10
moderators.
Option C: No Maximum Number of Moderators
Under the heading "Moderation Panel", replace clause 1
1 There shall be a panel of not less than 4 and not more than 12
moderators.
with
There shall be a panel of not less than 4 moderators.
Option D: Re-Open Discussion
Option E: Status Quo (No more than 12 moderators)
Proposal B - Change Voting Method (Simple Yes/No for all candidates)
If Option C on Proposal A wins then replace Clause 3.vi
vi. Voting will be by the Single Transferable Vote method, with a reopen
nominations candidate (RON) added to the ballot. If RON passes the
quota then all the then unfilled places are void requiring a new
election for those vacancies.
with
vi. Voting shall be by simple Yes/No vote for each candidate. Any
candidate receiving more Yes votes than No votes will be deemed
elected.
Candidates with more No votes than Yes votes or equal numbers of Yes
and No Votes will be deemed not elected.
If the election produces less than the minimum number of moderators
specified in clause 1 above, additional moderators will be co-opted
under the provisions of clause 3.xi below.
Proposal C - Change Voting Method (Where there are more candidates than
vacancies)
If Option C on Proposal A fails then either:
Option A: Voting by Simple Yes/No unless more candidates than vacancies
Replace Clause 3.vi
vi. Voting will be by the Single Transferable Vote method, with a reopen
nominations candidate (RON) added to the ballot. If RON passes the
quota then all the then unfilled places are void requiring a new
election for those vacancies.
with
vi. If the number of candidates is less than or equal to the maximum
number specified in clause 1 above, voting shall be by simple Yes/No
vote for each candidate.
Any candidate receiving more Yes votes than No votes will be deemed
elected. Candidates with more No votes than Yes votes or equal
numbers of Yes and No Votes will be deemed not elected.
If the number of candidates exceeds the maximum number specified in
clause 1 above, voting will be by the Single Transferable Vote
method, with a reopen nominations candidate (RON) added to the
ballot. If RON passes the quota then all the remaining candidates
are deemed not elected.
If the election produces less than the minimum number of moderators
specified in clause 1 above, additional moderators will be co-opted
under the provisions of clause 3.xi below.
Option B: Simple Yes/No, order of election determined by vote difference
Replace Clause 3.vi
vi. Voting will be by the Single Transferable Vote method, with a reopen
nominations candidate (RON) added to the ballot. If RON passes the
quota then all the then unfilled places are void requiring a new
election for those vacancies.
with
vi. Voting shall be by simple Yes/No vote for each candidate. Any
candidate receiving more Yes votes than No votes will be deemed
elected.
Candidates with more No votes than Yes votes or equal numbers of Yes
and No Votes will be deemed not elected.
In the event that more candidates than the maximum specified in
Clause 1 pass this test, those elected should be determined by
balance of 'yes' votes cast after 'no' votes have been deducted.
In the event of a tie, the absolute maximum of yes votes will
determine which candidate is elected.
If there is still a tie, time of receipt of nomination as determined
by the votetaker will be the final arbiter.
If the election produces less than the minimum number of moderators
specified in clause 1 above, additional moderators will be co-opted
under the provisions of clause 3.xi below.
Option C: Re-Open Discussion
Option D: Status Quo (Single Transferable Vote plus Re-Open Nominations)
Proposal D - Limit to Number of Consecutive Terms Served
Replace existing Clause 3.x
x. In the event of the resignation, removal or death of a moderator the
next highest candidate (if they are still willing) from the previous
election will be appointed for the remainder of the term.
with new Clause 3.x
x. No moderator may serve more than 3 consecutive terms. Moderators who
have served 3 consecutive terms must retire for a term before being
again eligible for election. Co-option part way through a term shall
not be considered to constitute a part of the three term limitation.
Whether Proposal D passes or fails, the following clause will also be
changed:
Replace existing Clause 3.xi
xi. If the number of moderators falls below 4 or if the moderators
consider it necessary due to excessive workload, they will appoint
such temporary moderators as are necessary (the total number of
moderators not to exceed 12) to efficiently moderate uk.gay-lesbian-
bi. Their appointment to be confirmed by a vote of the pre-approved
posters within 21 days. They will serve until the annual round of
elections are held.
with new Clause 3.xi
xi. If the number of moderators falls below the minimum number defined
in clause 1 above or if the moderators consider it necessary due to
excessive workload, they will co-opt such additional moderators as
are necessary (having regard to any maximum number defined in clause
1 above) to efficiently moderate uk.gay-lesbian-bi. Their co-option
shall be confirmed by a simple Yes/No vote (as defined in clause
3.vi above) for each of the additional moderators by the pre-
approved list posters within 28 days.
The co-opted moderators will serve until the annual round of
elections are held. [For the purposes of this clause, former
moderators in retirement following three consecutive terms shall not
be excluded from co-option. However, they shall not again be
eligible for election until they have been in retirement for a full
term]
[Note: The text in square brackets will only be included if Proposal D
passes]
========================================================================
Newsgroups Line:
uk.gay-lesbian-bi For bisexuals, lesbians and gays in the UK.
========================================================================
Revised Charter:
Charter of uk.gay-lesbian-bi (Moderated)
uk.gay-lesbian-bi provides a forum for the discussion of lesbian, gay
and bisexual related issues from a UK viewpoint, but not the morality of
such issues.
uk.gay-lesbian-bi is intended as a safe space for lesbians, gay men,
bisexuals, their friends and those interested in matters of sexuality.
All posters are requested to respect this.
The newsgroup is moderated and operates under the moderation guidelines
listed in the moderation policy statement contained within this charter.
Announcements of relevant events are allowed. Long announcements belong
in uk.announce.
Personal advertisements must not be posted to uk.gay-lesbian-bi; use
uk.adverts.personals.gay-lesbian-bi or one of the many other personal
groups instead.
Commercial advertising is forbidden.
Pointers to commercial sites fall under the rule about commercial
advertising other than statements in .sig files four lines or under in
length.
Test postings should be sent to appropriate test groups.
Excessive cross-posting is inappropriate. Posters are requested to
restrict cross-posting to no more than two other newsgroups and all such
articles must meet the requirements of the charters of all groups
involved. All cross-posts with other moderated groups, except those for
uk.net.news.announce and signed by Control, may be rejected unless
sequential approval rights have been established.
Encoded binaries e.g. pictures, compressed files, etc. are forbidden.
Such material belongs on a web or FTP site to which a pointer may be
posted. Cryptographic signatures e.g. PGP may be used where
authentication is important and should be as short as possible and under
ten lines.
All articles must be readable in plain text; no HTML, RTF, or similar,
or attachments are allowed. To see how to make your newsreader comply
with this, please read <http://www.usenet.org.uk/ukpost.html>.
Please do not top post; when quoting parts of a previous post please
retain the author's name and quote only enough to give context and place
your reply beneath the quoted section.
Warning
Anyone posting contrary to this charter may be reported to their
'postmaster' and, or, Service Provider.
Moderation Policy Statement
Method
Moderation will be by a pre-approved system: a semi-automatic moderation
bot running STUMP system or similar will receive all postings to the
group.
Individuals who have made one approved posting will automatically be
added to the pre-approved posters list, unless posting using a shared
non-individual generic 'From' address in which case all such articles
shall be approved individually.
All pre-approved posters will have their articles automatically accepted
and forwarded on to the group unless contrary to the auto-reject
software. Their pre-approved status can only be revoked by the
moderators if they violate the moderation policy and this action must be
supported by a two thirds majority of the moderation panel and reported
immediately to the group.
Withdrawal of pre-approved status will be for a period of one calendar
month, during which the poster shall be removed from the pre-approved
and added to the manual list and have articles manually moderated; upon
expiry of the withdrawal period they shall be removed from the manual
list and pre-approved status shall be restored on the same terms as
first time posters i.e. following their next posting of an approved
article. A record will be kept of all withdrawals of pre-approved status
for a period of twelve months from the date of withdrawal.
Pre-approved posters who have inadvertently breached the moderation
rules can apply to the moderators to be restored to the pre-approved
list sooner than one month and the moderators can do so if they are
satisfied that the offending post was genuinely made in error.
All encoded binaries, HTML and other non-plain posts identified by the
moderation software will be rejected by the moderation bot.
The remaining posts from people not on the pre-approved list will be
sent to the moderators.
The moderators will approve all postings regardless of content unless
they are:
i. a personal ad.
ii. a commercial article, including those aimed at overcoming the ban
on commercials e.g. by generating commercial URLs or pop-up
windows for the sole purpose of advertising or by including a
time-delayed subscription requirement or silent dialler.
iii. an encoded binary, HTML or non-plain text article that has escaped
the automatic software, or any article not readable as plain text;
no HTML, RTF or similarly formatted or word processor formats or
any attachments are allowed.
iv. an article cross-posted to more than four groups in total
including uk.gay-lesbian-bi; or an article cross-posted to another
moderated group unless a group where sequential approval rights
have been established; or unless to uk.net.news.announce and
signed by Control; cross-posted articles must meet the charter
requirements of all the groups involved.
v. a test post, except from a moderator or one of their Admins; all
zero content articles, random character or randomized text and
incomprehensible articles shall be deemed to be test posts.
vi. an identical debut article; or an article with identical content
or an article with similar content but different headers which has
been sent to the group more than twice in any 24 hour period; or
an identical or similar article which has been sent to the group
more than twice in any 24 hour period and which in the opinion of
a moderator forms part of a mail-bomb attack on the group and a
moderator's vote shall be obtained to ratify the action taken in
the interests of accountability.
vii. an article of spam or velveeta, defined as one which has been
multi- posted across usenet and, or, posted simultaneously or
separately to each of several other groups unless a request for
help or advice when consideration will be given since uk.gay-
lesbian-bi provides both and the article may be relevant to
several other groups.
viii. an article where the follow-up has been set by the author as part
of a flood to another hierarchy or group.
ix. an article intended for the moderators or their Admins including
all automatic responder messages; or a repetitive robot generated
reply to formal reject notifications and after 12 or more similar
replies auto-reject software will be activated to drop any
recurrences.
x. an article intended to scam or to acquire passwords or money, or
to request money or donations unless by an appropriate registered
community charity, or a robot or worm generated article.
The moderators will return these rejected posts to the sender, if one
can be identified, with an appropriate standard e-mail of explanation:
Personal ads, and suggest that future ads should be sent to
uk.adverts.personals.gay-lesbian-bi or other personals newsgroups,
mailing lists or websites. A personal ad is an article with no other
content such as could be sent to a personals newsgroup or appear in a
lonely hearts column, or one which is aimed at someone more or less
unknown. Where the poster appears to need guidance or help a personal
e-mail from a moderator will also be sent to offer appropriate advice.
All personals sites will be rejected as personals (or, sometimes, as
commercial and all subscription sites will be rejected as commercial).
A posting that exceeds the cross-posted limit of four groups; or a
posting that includes another moderated group unless necessary
sequential approval rights have been established.
Multiple or identical postings.
Test posts.
Commercial posts.
A posting in other than readable plain text.
Encoded binary posts, and scam, robot and worm articles will be
rejected but not returned.
If a moderator doubts that a post falls within one of these categories
then they should seek clarification from the poster whenever possible,
or guidance by simple majority from the moderation panel, before action
is taken; the panel are also guided by FAQ3. If a reasonable doubt still
exists then the moderators will approve the article.
Unless on notified leave a moderator will have been deemed to have
abstained from any website or e-mail discussion if no response is made
within three days of the matter first being flagged or raised. A quorum
for all panel decisions where a majority or two-thirds is required shall
comprise at least four moderators.
Openness
The moderation software will make a monthly report to the group stating
the number of articles received, approved and rejected by robot and
human moderators, the total number of human moderator articles processed
and the total of new posters pre-approved. Logs of the moderators'
actions are available on a web page maintained on the moderation server.
Rejected articles (other than binaries, for which only the headers will
be kept) will be held on the server for public inspection for one month
after they have been rejected. Excessively long articles may be
truncated to 60 lines before storing them in the archive. Action to
withdraw pre-approved status and commence manual moderation of an
individual will immediately be communicated to the group.
The moderators will be subject to annual election and recall as set out
below.
Housekeeping the pre-approved list
After notice on the group, the contents of the pre-approved posters list
shall be reviewed on a rolling monthly basis with any inactive address
older than six months to be automatically dropped. A record of one
year's worth of names shall be maintained and once a Votetaker has been
requested all names added to the pre-approved list before close of
voting shall be added to it, and this will used by the Votetaker to
determine voting eligibility in matters regarding the moderators. The
server Admins shall carry out appropriate housekeeping on the pre-
approved list only in the interests of security and integrity and as and
when necessary and agreed with the moderation panel.
Requests for removal of pre-approved listing
Anyone who wishes to have their name removed from the pre-approved list
may e-mail their request direct to the moderators' list.
Cancels
The moderators or their Admins may issue cancels for any articles not
authorized or approved by the moderation system, e.g. where forged
headers or similarly non-approved articles have eluded the moderation
process.
Moderation Panel
Composition
1. There shall be a panel of not less than 4 and not more than 12
moderators.
Election
2. Initially moderators shall be the panel elected as part of the
charter change process.
3. Then each year thereafter elections will be held for the posts of
moderator.
i. 11 months after moderation comes into effect (and every twelve
months subsequently) the moderation panel will appoint a neutral
party to conduct the election as votetaker. The votetaker will
issue a call for nominations for a new moderation panel.
ii. Nominations will be open for 10 days and to be valid each nominee
will have to be proposed and seconded by pre-approved posters
(self-nomination is permitted). All pre-approved posters shall
have the right to vote, regardless as to whether they were pre-
approved before or after the opening of nominations.
iii. At the end of 10 days a list of candidates (including their
proposers/seconders) will be published.
iv. A five day period of hustings will be held during which the
candidates will answer questions from posters to the group.
v. The votetaker will issue the first call for votes, to be followed
by a second call for votes five days later, the voting period
lasting in all for 10 days, votes shall only be valid if submitted
on official ballot forms.
vi. Voting will be by the Single Transferable Vote method, with a
reopen nominations candidate (RON) added to the ballot. If RON
passes the quota then all the then unfilled places are void
requiring a new election for those vacancies.
vii. Each voter shall receive an acknowledgement from the votetaker.
They will be given a unique identification as part of their
acknowledgement, this will enable them to verify their vote when
the result is published while protecting their identity from other
voters.
viii. The votetaker will publish the result and a voting list comprising
voter identifiers and their vote.
ix. In the event of less than 4 moderators being elected or RON
passing quota the votetaker will issue a second request for
nominations no later than 1 month after the close of ballot and
hold elections for the remaining vacancies. Those elected at this
election shall serve until the annual round of elections are held.
x. In the event of the resignation, removal or death of a moderator
the next highest candidate (if they are still willing) from the
previous election will be appointed for the remainder of the term.
xi. If the number of moderators falls below the minimum number defined
in clause 1 above or if the moderators consider it necessary due
to excessive workload, they will co-opt such additional moderators
as are necessary (having regard to any maximum number defined in
clause 1 above) to efficiently moderate uk.gay-lesbian-bi. Their
co-option shall be confirmed by a simple Yes/No vote (as defined
in clause 3.vi above) for each of the additional moderators by the
pre- approved list posters within 28 days.
The co-opted moderators will serve until the annual round of
elections are held.
Leave of Absence and Removal
4. Moderators should inform the moderating team of periods when they
will be inactive. The moderation panel may appoint a temporary moderator
to stand in during this period, the position being offered first to the
highest loser from the last election, or failing that a person of their
choice.
Other than such periods any moderator that does not take part in
moderation activity for 21 consecutive days shall automatically be
removed from the moderation team.
5. Moderators who either approve excluded posts or decline to approve
non-excluded posts may be removed by a two thirds decision of the other
moderators.
6. Any moderator may be removed by a vote of no confidence.
i. Such a vote may be proposed by any pre-approved poster and will
need to be supported by 9 other pre-approved posters.
ii. People on the pre-approved list at the time when the vote of no
confidence is tabled shall be eligible to vote on such a proposal
i.e. people added to the pre-approved list after the formal
request for a no confidence vote will not be permitted to vote on
this occasion.
iii. A ballot should be held within 10 days of a formal request for a
vote of no confidence. A neutral person will be asked by the
moderation panel to conduct the ballot.
The question shall be:-
"Do you have confidence in X as a moderator of uk.gay-lesbian-bi
yes/no/abstain"
iv. For the purposes of calculating a majority only votes yes or no
will count. A simple majority of votes cast for no shall indicate
that the group has no confidence in the moderator and s/he shall
immediately be removed from the moderation panel.
v. A vote of no confidence in the whole moderation panel will not be
permitted, only a vote for each individual moderator.
vi. The votetaker shall use the same anonymising method as outlined
for the annual election of moderators and shall publish the result
with the anonymous identifiers and how they voted.
vii. After the conclusion of a vote of no confidence which fails no
such similar motion shall be brought against the same person for a
period of three calendar months.
Moderation Software and Location
The moderation software shall be the STUMP system or similar, and shall
be located on a server as agreed by the Admins and moderation team.
STUMP (Secure Team-based Usenet Moderation Program) logs all decisions
automatically on a website, and is fully described at:
<http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/usenet/scrm/robomod/robomod.html>.
The moderators will arrange a back up server and in the event of the
loss of the moderation server will ensure the back up server provides
continuity.
Changes to Moderation Policy
All changes to moderation policy will be treated as a formal charter
change requiring a full RFD and CFV in uk.net.news.announce cross-posted
to uk.net.news.config and uk.gay-lesbian-bi.
Moderators
Bryan
Dale
Gregoire Kretz
Kate West
Paul Anderson
PaulG
Stephen M Baines
Yaz
The names of current moderators are published regularly on the newsgroup
and on the newsgroup's web page.
Moderation submission address
uk-gay-lesbian-bi@usenet.org.uk
The moderators themselves may be contacted at
uk-gay-lesbian-bi-request@usenet.org.uk
or, for purely administrative matters
uk-gay-lesbian-bi-admin@usenet.org.uk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG-v1.2.4-(GNU/Linux)
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBQpYrD2OfGXkh8vHZAQEfgwP/Qv56SDsRkgS1qsoaibVhjZiv+EwoRf7A
J9xbGSPK44CB9gvFqmE+I1f76PGUzR3TBQHjrWkdekD1LhQs1TNSvhg/JyI89vpP
dZFnWnjMpdbXspiY/5C0t04wwIgfSZx20UCRjspk1T97mj465xEp9rLM3EOJ6bja
QT788mY022w=
=69ah
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
You can also see the raw article.
Back ot the UKVoting homepage
