🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1ejd2mINN2uv@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU> randall-joshua@yale.edu (Joshua Randall) writes:
>This is fine, but calling this is CFV is *not* OK!  For one thing, I haven't
>seen *any* discussion of this on news.groups, let alone a formal RFD.
>
>If a simple majority wins then this is by no means a formal CFV and should
>not be called one.
>
>So, in summary:
>
>(1)  Post the charter
>
>(2)  Ask for discussion, and then hold a formal RFD
>
>(3)  If there is interest, post a CFV which follows the guidelines.

You're confusing this with the "Guidelines for newsgroup creation",
which has nothing to do with this new vote.  It's simply the moderator
asking people what he should do, and doing so by adopting procedures
*similar* to newsgroup creation.  As moderator, he could just arbitrarily
decide;  he has instead chosen to ask people on the net what they think.
Whether it's called a "CFV", "Straw Poll", "Request For Input" or
"Rose By Another Name", there certainly is no need for him to follow
all of the newsgroup creation guidelines.

-- 
Michael Bryan  michael@resonex.com  "Milk and Cheese in '92!"  |     ,_,
"There's nothing quite like watching your most recent          |    /oo \
crush, and your second-most recent crush, rushing into         |    <>__|
each others' arms..."  --- Miss Almira Gulch                   |    |  U|