21 Feb 2013: Amend Charter of uk.rec.cycling.moderated
From: Barry Salter <bsalter@ukvoting.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 21:59:29 +0000
Subject: RESULT - Amend Charter of uk.rec.cycling.moderated FAILS 25:41
Newsgroups: uk.net.news.announce,uk.net.news.config,uk.net.news.moderation,uk.rec.cycling.moderated
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
RESULT OF CALL FOR VOTES
Summary: Amend Charter of uk.rec.cycling.moderated
Amend Charter of uk.rec.cycling.moderated FAILS 25:41
NO beat YES by a majority of 16 votes. For the proposal to succeed,
there must be 12 more YES votes than NO votes. Accordingly, the proposal
FAILS.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Voting closed at 23:59:59 GMT, 15th February 2013.
Proponent : Mark Goodge <mark (at) good-stuff (dot) co (dot) uk>
Votetaker: Barry Salter <urcm2-queries (at) ukvotes.southie.me.uk>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribution:
These results have been posted to the following newsgroups:
uk.net.news.announce
uk.net.news.config
uk.rec.cycling.moderated
uk.net.news.moderation
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Results:
The results follow below in the following order:
1) Summary of Mail Received During the Voting Period
2) Results
3) Individual Vote Details
4) Votetakers Comments
5) Voting and Appeal Guidelines
6) Rationale
7) Newsgroups Line
8) Proposal
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY OF MAIL RECEIVED DURING THE VOTING PERIOD
90 messages were received to the Ballot Request Address, of which:
88 were valid Ballot Requests
2 were test messages sent by the votetaker
69 messages were received to the Voting Address, of which:
68 were valid votes
1 was a revote requested for technical reasons
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESULTS:
Amend Charter of uk.rec.cycling.moderated
YES : 25 votes
NO : 41 votes
ABSTAIN : 2 votes
Total : 68 votes
NO beat YES by a majority of 16 votes. For the proposal to succeed,
there must be 12 more YES votes than NO votes. Accordingly, the proposal
FAILS.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
INDIVIDUAL VOTE DETAILS
Voted Yes - 25 votes
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
attila#the#moderator#googlemail#com Steve Walker
Brian#bjforster#force9#co#uk Brian
chl#clerew#man#ac#uk Charles Lindsey
crn#netunix#com crn@NOSPAM.netunix.com
david#kemper#ntlworld#com David Kemper
davidlang#blueyonder#co#uk The Medway Handyman
iain-b#dircon#co#uk Iain
jcb#news#ntlworld#com John Blundell
judith#smith#outlook#com Judith
katstuff#the-kat#org kat
mark#good-stuff#co#uk Mark Goodge
mentalguy2k8#gmail#com Mentalguy2k8
mike#jasper#org#uk Mike Tomlinson
mrbenn_usenet#yahoo#com John Benn
muzhmuzh#centrum#sk Peter Keller
Nick#Spam#yahoo#co#uk Nick
noparadise#gmail#com noparadise
owenrees#fastmail#fm Owen Rees
periander#of#corinth#googlemail#com Periander
peter#wpp#ltd#uk Peter Parry
tapan#blueyonder#co#uk Trevor A Panther
tom#britsc#com Bertie Wooster
usenet#jan2013#adslpipe#co#uk Andy Burns
xurcm2#mollymockford#me#uk Molly Mockford
{voter}#watman#clara#co#uk paul
Voted No - 41 votes
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
alan#p#collier#googlemail#com The Luggage
alex#ap-consulting#co#uk Alex Potter
andyl#azaal#plus#com Andy Leighton
armb#chiark#greenend#org#uk Alan Braggins
ben#darling#tesco#net ben.darling@outlook.com
clive#evil-c#co#uk Clive George
colin#nelson2#ntlworld#com Colin Nelson
colin#colinreed#co#uk Colin Reed
damerell#chiark#greenend#org#uk David Damerell
geomannie#googlemail#com geomannie
graham#drabble#me#uk Graham Drabble
guddies#btinternet#com Sigi Gudd
ian#clifton#chem#ox#ac#uk I J Clifton
ijackson#chiark#greenend#org#uk Ian Jackson
jaimie#sometimes#sessile#org Jaimie Vandenbergh
jcb#inf#ed#ac#uk Julian Bradfield
john#zothique#plus#com John Kendall
jongru#btinternet#com The Todal
louisxiv#spamcop#net Pete Lindsay
m#r#causer#googlemail#com Mike Causer
matthew#debian#org Matthew Vernon
matthew#woodcraft#me#uk Matthew Woodcraf
mcpheat#hotmail#com mcp
mdw#distorted#org#uk Mark Wooding
michael#richard#jones#gmail#com Mike Jones
mike#urgle#com Mike Bristow
news2011#colyer#plus#com Danny Colyer
NEWS#sarlet#com Roger Merriman
news#thenyes#org#uk Graham Nye
nige#danton#gmail#com Nige Danton
nmm1#cam#ac#uk Nick Maclaren
not-for-mail#ahjg#co#uk Anthony Gold
owend#chiark#greenend#org#uk Owen Dunn
p#j#clinch#dundee#ac#uk Peter Clinch
palmersperry#yahoo#com Alistair Gunn
phil#lee-family#me#uk Phil W Lee
pschleck#oasis#novia#net Paul W. Schleck
rjk#greenend#org#uk Richard Kettlewell
roger+urcm201301#nospam#firedrake#org Roger Burton West
sarakirk#blueyonder#co#uk Sara Merriman
tcnw81#tarrcity#demon#co#uk Wm
Abstained - 2 votes
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
mark#aziraphale#homeip#net Mark Williams
news#timjackson#plus#com Tim Jackson
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Votetakers Comments:
Overall a relatively simple vote to run, with the usual peaks in voting
at the point the CFVs were posted, tailing off around the half way point
and again towards the end of the voting period.
One voter seemed to be a little confused by the "comments to votetaker"
section and requested the address in the results be changed. Explicit
instructions as to how to do so were provided, but they elected not to
do so, so are listed against their original address.
Voter verification was mostly problem free due to most voters being
"known", but it came to the attention of the votetaker that certain
providers are stripping or encrypting key headers from messages sent
through their services, making verification of votes from same somewhat
more difficult.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
This vote was conducted by a neutral third party member of UKVoting.
UKVoting is a group of independent votetakers who count votes on CFVs on
behalf of the uk.* hierarchy and other 3rd parties. The rules under
which this vote is taken are posted regularly to uk.net.news.announce or
can be found at the following URL: <http://www.usenet.org.uk/voting.html>
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 (dot) org (dot) uk.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
RATIONALE:
There has been much discussion in uk.net.news.* regarding the moderation
policy of uk.rec.cycling.moderated. In particular, one of the issues is
the moderation policy with regards to banned posters.
This RFD seeks to amend the charter to clarify this policy. It should be
noted that no change is proposed to the ability of the moderators to ban
individuals from poosting to the group; the intent is simply to ensure
that any ban is both transparent and proportionate.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEWSGROUPS LINE
uk.rec.cycling.moderated Cycling in the UK (Moderated)
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROPOSAL
At the end of the first section of the charter of
uk.rec.cycling.moderated (immediately prior to the section headed
"Binaries and Formatting"), add the following text:
The moderators may, at their discretion, maintain a list of contributors
who can reasonably be expected to abide by the charter and moderation
policy when posting. Posts from contributors on this list may be
approved automatically by the moderation software without the need for
human intervention.
Posts from any contributor, whether on the pass list or not, which can
be determined by software to be in breach of the charter or the
published moderation policy (for example, those not in plain text or
crossposted beyond any limits imposed by the moderation policy), or
which are not validly formatted Usenet messages, may be rejected or
discarded automatically by the moderation software without the need for
human intervention.
For all other articles the decision on whether to approve or reject any
post will be made solely according to its content and not the identity
of the author, with one exception:
If an individual is responsible for a significant number of posts which
are in breach of the charter, irrespective of whether they were rejected
due to their content or were approved, then that person may be banned
from posting to the group for either a fixed or indeterminate length of
time.
In all cases when a person is banned, an announcement of that fact,
including the reasons for the ban and the length of the ban, shall be
posted to the group by the moderators. The ban may not take effect until
after this notice has been posted.
Where a ban is of indeterminate length, a notice shall also be posted to
the group should the moderators choose to rescind it. No notice is
necessary when a fixed-length ban expires.
Any posts rejected as being by a banned poster must show the ban as the
reason for the rejection, both in the public moderation logs and any
rejection email sent to the poster.
END PROPOSAL
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 1.4.10
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBUSaYwWOfGXkh8vHZAQFZtQP9EYgNsJI49qwOWeaFrWoG3xMX9unNLa+V
y7ekvsokFByWR8Ftw4FFNJFuWfnLSiGasvZx8ZSP07mDDwTcNzGig5ckmGJlQAyO
IYR6kHQ6ZJf4iy940mdBdLW3ETyyx13We8riC9J/Dnv1QlzyXHIdoyLqsDMpLgSd
mezUtz8O1xc=
=YLHT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
You can also see the raw article.
Back ot the UKVoting homepage
