• Your Trusted Usenet Provider
  • Secure, Private, Unlimited

Newsgroups Main » Newsgroups Directory » Science and Technology » Psychology

General ( sci.philosophy )
 
From [email protected] Fri Oct 27 00:47:06 1995
Path: uunet!bounce-back
From: [email protected] (Will Wagers)
Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,alt.archaeology,alt.mythology,sci.anthropology,sci.archaeology,sci.astro,soc.history
Subject: RFD: sci.philosophy.natural moderated
Followup-To: news.groups
Date: 27 Oct 1995 04:46:10 -0000
Organization: .
Lines: 252
Sender: [email protected]
Approved: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rodan.uu.net
Archive-Name: sci.philosophy.natural
Xref: uunet news.announce.newgroups:7768 news.groups:171565 alt.archaeology:1549 alt.mythology:21118 sci.anthropology:19619 sci.archaeology:32704 sci.astro:106966 soc.history:60200

                     REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
                moderated group sci.philosophy.natural

This is an official RFD (Request For Discussion) for the creation of the
Usenet newsgroup sci.philosophy.natural. It outlines the proposal for this
new group, and is - as it says - for discussion. This discussion should
take place in the newsgroup news.groups. Please keep the discussion out of
other newsgroups and mailing lists in order to disrupt them as little as
possible.

Please *do not vote yet*. The minimum required discussion period for the
RFD is 21 days. The CFV (Call For Votes) shall be announced at a later
date.

RATIONALE: sci.philosophy.natural

sci.philosophy.natural will meet a long-standing demand for a moderated
newsgroup for the scholarly discussion of and publications on ancient
natural philosophy (science) without flames and without unfounded
'speculative' postings. The proposed newsgroup would not replace any
existing groups. There is a small overlap with *many* existing newsgroups
and mailing lists in that subjects appropriate to sci.philosophy.natural
are occasionally discussed there. One purpose of sci.philosophy.natural is
to bring these discussions under one roof to faciliate interdisciplinary
scholarship. In some cases, this may result in offloading some traffic from
high volume newsgroups and mailing lists. It would still leave any and all
posters the forums that currently exist, so there is no question of denying
anyone an outlet for their ideas. The small number of newsgroups and
mailing lists which regularly deal with topics appropriate to
sci.philosophy.natural may regard the proposed newsgroup as a means of
publishing finished articles after the rounds of specialist comment and
criticism have occurred.

Minority viewpoints are seldom embraced and are often actively discouraged
on many specialist moderated newsgroups and mailing lists which are
dominated by a small group of established "experts". sci.philosophy.natural
welcomes minority and controversial viewpoints which are *justified by
scholarship and which pass moderation*.

The number of potential readers is difficult to estimate due to the
interdisciplinary nature of the group. However, a small survey for a single
subject area encompassed by sci.philosophy.natural drew 132 interested
readers or contributors. Many mailing lists from which
sci.philosophy.natural would draw participation have 300+ members.

CHARTER: sci.philosophy.natural

sci.philosophy.natural shall be a moderated newsgroup dedicated to the
discussion of and publications on ancient natural philosophy. All
viewpoints and levels of knowledge are welcome, subject to the moderation
policy described below. Because natural philosophy is such a broad subject
and because lively debate on issues is encouraged, this group is moderated
by a panel. Prospective articles are assigned to a moderator with skills
appropriate for approval. This method will hopefully lead to the fastest
turn-around time and least intrusion possible. Articles will *not* be
rejected based on whether the moderator(s) disagree with the views
expressed. The text itself will either be accepted as-is or rejected. In
some cases, the moderator may suggest changes.

Moderation policy:

* Articles may be full-length or extracts, requests for information,
announcements of relevance, etc. Lengthy quotation (more than 30 lines) of
source material must be accompanied by commentary or by other text which
ties it to on-going discussions. Articles which quote substantially the
same source material repetitively will not be approved. Articles consisting
of materials which are available on-line at ftp or WWW sites will not be
approved, rather pointers to sites may be given. Moderator(s) may waive
this rule at their discretion.

* Articles which contain personal attacks of any sort will not be approved
for posting.

* Articles which confuse politics with other subjects will be refused.

* Flameless disagreements are welcome; but, if a thread looks as though
it's never going to be resolved, the moderator(s) reserve the right to
terminate it or suspend it until new evidence is produced.

* Blank messages, test messages, advertisements, MAKE.MONEY.FAST, binaries,
uuencoded messages, and so forth, will not be approved posting.

* This is *not* a forum for the discussion of purely 'speculative' works,
such as those of Von Daniken, etc. So if you want to post something arguing
that aliens built the Pyramids, expect it to be rejected unless you can
offer citations from accepted professional journals. You will still have
the existing news groups in which to post.

* Moderator(s) may, at their discretion, change the Subject: lines for
threads which have strayed from the initial subject.

* Articles which include excessive quoting (e.g. an article which quotes an
entire other article in order to add a few comments at the end) will be
trimmed by the moderator(s).

* An article *must* have a valid reply-to address or it will not be
approved for posting.

* Cross-posting is strongly discouraged and requires a compelling reason
for approval.

* Rejected articles which would be acceptable after editing will be
returned to the poster with an explanation and suggestions for change.
Articles rejected for other reasons may be shared with the other moderators
for group consideration if the poster wishes to appeal.

* Any article that contains more than fifty percent quoted material (and
the author's signature shall not count as original material for purposes of
determining the proportion) may be trimmed or rejected at the discretion of
the moderator(s). In exercising this discretion, the moderator(s) shall
take readability considerations into account, such as the amount of quoted
material at the beginning of the message, and the size of the blocks of
quoted material. If the entire length of the article (excluding header and
signature) is less than 24 lines of 80 characters, then the requirement of
50% original material may be waived at the moderator's discretion.

* In keeping with Usenet netiquette conventions, signatures should be
restricted to 5 lines. Moderators may, at their discretion, trim signatures
to four lines before posting articles. Signatures may not sport commercial,
political, obscene, or contentious figures or slogans.

* Scholarly postings are considered the intellectual property of the
poster. If you intend to quote original material, e.g. to another newsgroup
or mailing list, permission must be sought from the original poster.

Moderators:

The proposer of the group is the initial moderator and is responsible for
recruiting others. If the number of moderators fall below four (4),
volunteers will be solicited. An automatic script will be used to share
postings among the moderators.

It is important to have a clear policy to cover the possibility that there
is conflict in the affairs of the moderation panel itself. It is generally
believed that moderators will come and go throughout the course of the
group, and in all cases the goal will be a consensus amongst the panel
regarding the addition of new moderators. A standard group decision process
will be followed: a motion will be made to add a new moderator, and if
there are no objections it will go ahead. Friendly relations are certainly
expected.

If there is an objection to a motion, and a group decision is not reached
by discussion, a vote can be carried out in accordance with the statements
below. In any of the following cases, a secret ballot may be requested --
and if a suitable (meaning: agreeably neutral) volunteer on the panel to
collect the ballots cannot be found, will be carried out via point #5 below
-- but voting will generally be public (within the confines of the
moderation panel itself).

1. If it comes to a vote, new moderators must be approved by a
supermajority (75% rounded downward, ie. two out of three moderators, eight
out of eleven moderators, nine out of twelve moderators, etc.) amongst the
moderation panel. Abstentions will not affect the outcome of this vote,
meaning that a supermajority among voting moderators must be obtained. In
the case of only two voting moderators who disagree, the prospective
moderator will not be added.

2. Moderators who will be unavailable for more than a week are expected to
have their names removed from the active file for that period. This implies
no permanent change in status, and they will be simply returned to active
duty afterward.

3. New moderators will be considered if the number of moderators falls
below four, or if several moderators have taken extended leaves of absence.
In the latter case, any new moderators will be "temporary" unless accepted
by the returning members of the moderation panel. Additional "temporary"
moderators will be added as required to handle various specialities, e.g.
ancient mathematics, ancient physics, archaeoastronomy, linguistics, etc.
If the volume of submissions warrants, such "temporary" moderators will be
made permanent. People named as successors by retiring moderators will
generally be given preference.

4. Moderators can be removed by a supermajority (as above) vote amongst the
moderation panel (including the moderator in question). Abstentions will
count as votes against removal.

5. If there is controversy amongst the moderators concerning the
application of these guidelines, the moderation panel agrees to submit to
binding arbitration by moderators-advice at UUNET. This situation covers
true interpretive controversy, as well as such technical scenarios as: only
two moderators, one wanting to remove the other; so many moderators on
extended leave or genuinely unresponsive that the active panel cannot
remove them to get on with business, etc.

6. Any votes or motions may be called into question by moderators returning
from leaves of absence, though these ballots may be counted as abstentions
in the interim.

7. All prospective moderators must agree to abide by these guidelines in
their entirety before consideration for moderator status. By acting as a
moderator, this point is implied, regardless of written confirmation.

Changes:

It requires unanimous approval of the moderation panel to change these
guidelines; and, they must remain within the broad outlines given in the
original CFV charter.

END CHARTER.

MODERATOR INFO: sci.philosophy.natural

Moderator: [email protected] (Will Wagers)

END MODERATOR INFO.

PROCEDURE:

Posting of this RFD initiates a discussion period of at least 21 days.
Discussion about the proposed newsgroup will take place on news.groups,
which is a newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of new newsgroups, and all
interested people are encouraged to participate. If you post messages about
this RFD, please ensure that your article headers include:

Newsgroups: news.groups
Followup-To: news.groups

If you wish to post to news.groups, but don't have access, you may mail
your post to [email protected]

After the discussion period, a Call For Votes (CFV) will be posted to the
newsgroups and mailing lists this RFD was posted to, and to any other
appropriate newsgroups or lists suggested during the discussion.

The CFV will include directions for mailing votes to a neutral votetaker.
The voting period will be at least 21 days.

The group will pass the vote if it receives 100 more YES votes than NO
votes *and* twice as many YES votes as NO votes.

DISTRIBUTION:

This RFD shall be crossposted to the following newsgroups:

news.announce.newgroups, news.groups, alt.archaeology, alt.mythology,
sci.anthropology, sci.archaeology, sci.astro, soc.history

and the following mailing lists:

ANCIEN-L, ANE, ARCH-L, H-IDEAS, INDOEUROPEAN-L, INDOLOGY, ISLAM-L,
LEUCIPPUS, LITSCI-L, LT-ANTIQ, MEDSCI-L, SSREL-L, THEOLOG-L

Note

Pointers will be posted to additional groups and mailing lists notifying
them where to find this RFD. Post discussion on this RFD *only* to
news.groups under the thread "RFD: sci.philosophy.natural moderated".
Please don't discuss it in other newsgroups. This is not a Call for Votes.
Do not try to vote now.

Proponent: Will Wagers <[email protected]>
Mentor: Mark James <[email protected]>

From [email protected] Mon Nov 20 23:01:00 1995
Path: uunet!bounce-back
From: David Bostwick <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,alt.archaeology,alt.mythology,sci.anthropology,sci.archaeology,sci.astro,soc.history
Subject: CFV: sci.philosophy.natural moderated
Followup-To: poster
Date: 21 Nov 1995 04:00:52 -0000
Organization: Usenet Volunteer Votetakers
Lines: 273
Sender: [email protected]
Approved: [email protected]
Expires: 13 Dec 1995 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-To: David Bostwick <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rodan.uu.net
Archive-Name: sci.philosophy.natural
Xref: uunet news.announce.newgroups:7908 news.groups:175163 alt.archaeology:1738 alt.mythology:22330 sci.anthropology:19944 sci.archaeology:33816 sci.astro:109436 soc.history:61337

                     FIRST CALL FOR VOTES (of 2)
                moderated group sci.philosophy.natural

Newsgroups line:
sci.philosophy.natural	Ancient natural philosophy. (Moderated)

Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC, 12 Dec 1995.

This vote is being conducted by a neutral third party.  Questions about
the proposed group should be directed to the proponent.

Proponent: Will Wagers <[email protected]>
Mentor:  Mark James <[email protected]>
Votetaker: David Bostwick <[email protected]>

RATIONALE: sci.philosophy.natural

sci.philosophy.natural will meet a long-standing demand for a moderated
newsgroup for the scholarly discussion of and publications on ancient
natural philosophy (science) without flames and without unfounded
'speculative' postings. The proposed newsgroup would not replace any
existing groups. There is a small overlap with *many* existing newsgroups
and mailing lists in that subjects appropriate to sci.philosophy.natural
are occasionally discussed there. One purpose of sci.philosophy.natural is
to bring these discussions under one roof to facilitate interdisciplinary
scholarship. In some cases, this may result in offloading some traffic from
high volume newsgroups and mailing lists. It would still leave any and all
posters the forums that currently exist, so there is no question of denying
anyone an outlet for their ideas. The small number of newsgroups and
mailing lists which regularly deal with topics appropriate to
sci.philosophy.natural may regard the proposed newsgroup as a means of
publishing finished articles after the rounds of specialist comment and
criticism have occurred.

Minority viewpoints are seldom embraced and are often actively discouraged
on many specialist moderated newsgroups and mailing lists which are
dominated by a small group of established "experts". sci.philosophy.natural
welcomes minority and controversial viewpoints which are *justified by
scholarship and which pass moderation*.

The number of potential readers is difficult to estimate due to the
interdisciplinary nature of the group. However, a small survey for a single
subject area encompassed by sci.philosophy.natural drew 132 interested
readers or contributors. Many mailing lists from which
sci.philosophy.natural would draw participation have 300+ members.

CHARTER: sci.philosophy.natural

sci.philosophy.natural shall be a moderated newsgroup dedicated to the
discussion of and publications on ancient natural philosophy. All
viewpoints and levels of knowledge are welcome, subject to the moderation
policy described below. Because natural philosophy is such a broad subject
and because lively debate on issues is encouraged, this group is moderated
by a panel. Prospective articles are assigned to a moderator with skills
appropriate for approval. This method will hopefully lead to the fastest
turn-around time and least intrusion possible. Articles will *not* be
rejected based on whether the moderator(s) disagree with the views
expressed. The text itself will either be accepted as-is or rejected. In
some cases, the moderator may suggest changes.

Moderation policy:

* Articles may be full-length or extracts, requests for information,
announcements of relevance, etc. Lengthy quotation (more than 30 lines) of
source material must be accompanied by commentary or by other text which
ties it to on-going discussions. Articles which quote substantially the
same source material repetitively will not be approved. Articles consisting
of materials which are available on-line at ftp or WWW sites will not be
approved, rather pointers to sites may be given. Moderator(s) may waive
this rule at their discretion.

* Articles which contain personal attacks of any sort will not be approved
for posting.

* Articles which confuse politics with other subjects will be refused.

* Flameless disagreements are welcome; but, if a thread looks as though
it's never going to be resolved, the moderator(s) reserve the right to
terminate it or suspend it until new evidence is produced.

* Blank messages, test messages, advertisements, MAKE.MONEY.FAST, binaries,
uuencoded messages, and so forth, will not be approved posting.

* This is *not* a forum for the discussion of purely 'speculative' works,
such as those of Von Daniken, etc. So if you want to post something arguing
that aliens built the Pyramids, expect it to be rejected unless you can
offer citations from accepted professional journals. You will still have
the existing news groups in which to post.

* Moderator(s) may, at their discretion, change the Subject: lines for
threads which have strayed from the initial subject.

* Articles which include excessive quoting (e.g. an article which quotes an
entire other article in order to add a few comments at the end) will be
trimmed by the moderator(s).

* An article *must* have a valid reply-to address or it will not be
approved for posting.

* Cross-posting is strongly discouraged and requires a compelling reason
for approval.

* Rejected articles which would be acceptable after editing will be
returned to the poster with an explanation and suggestions for change.
Articles rejected for other reasons may be shared with the other moderators
for group consideration if the poster wishes to appeal.

* Any article that contains more than fifty percent quoted material (and
the author's signature shall not count as original material for purposes of
determining the proportion) may be trimmed or rejected at the discretion of
the moderator(s). In exercising this discretion, the moderator(s) shall
take readability considerations into account, such as the amount of quoted
material at the beginning of the message, and the size of the blocks of
quoted material. If the entire length of the article (excluding header and
signature) is less than 24 lines of 80 characters, then the requirement of
50% original material may be waived at the moderator's discretion.

* In keeping with Usenet netiquette conventions, signatures should be
restricted to 5 lines. Moderators may, at their discretion, trim signatures
to four lines before posting articles. Signatures may not sport commercial,
political, obscene, or contentious figures or slogans.

* Scholarly postings are considered the intellectual property of the
poster. If you intend to quote original material, e.g. to another newsgroup
or mailing list, permission must be sought from the original poster.

Moderators:

The proposer of the group is the initial moderator and is responsible for
recruiting others. If the number of moderators fall below four (4),
volunteers will be solicited. An automatic script will be used to share
postings among the moderators.

It is important to have a clear policy to cover the possibility that there
is conflict in the affairs of the moderation panel itself. It is generally
believed that moderators will come and go throughout the course of the
group, and in all cases the goal will be a consensus amongst the panel
regarding the addition of new moderators. A standard group decision process
will be followed: a motion will be made to add a new moderator, and if
there are no objections it will go ahead. Friendly relations are certainly
expected.

If there is an objection to a motion, and a group decision is not reached
by discussion, a vote can be carried out in accordance with the statements
below. In any of the following cases, a secret ballot may be requested --
and if a suitable (meaning: agreeably neutral) volunteer on the panel to
collect the ballots cannot be found, will be carried out via point #5 below
-- but voting will generally be public (within the confines of the
moderation panel itself).

1. If it comes to a vote, new moderators must be approved by a
supermajority (75% rounded downward, ie. two out of three moderators, eight
out of eleven moderators, nine out of twelve moderators, etc.) amongst the
moderation panel. Abstentions will not affect the outcome of this vote,
meaning that a supermajority among voting moderators must be obtained. In
the case of only two voting moderators who disagree, the prospective
moderator will not be added.

2. Moderators who will be unavailable for more than a week are expected to
have their names removed from the active file for that period. This implies
no permanent change in status, and they will be simply returned to active
duty afterward.

3. New moderators will be considered if the number of moderators falls
below four, or if several moderators have taken extended leaves of absence.
In the latter case, any new moderators will be "temporary" unless accepted
by the returning members of the moderation panel. Additional "temporary"
moderators will be added as required to handle various specialities, e.g.
ancient mathematics, ancient physics, archaeoastronomy, linguistics, etc.
If the volume of submissions warrants, such "temporary" moderators will be
made permanent. People named as successors by retiring moderators will
generally be given preference.

4. Moderators can be removed by a supermajority (as above) vote amongst the
moderation panel (including the moderator in question). Abstentions will
count as votes against removal.

5. If there is controversy amongst the moderators concerning the
application of these guidelines, the moderation panel agrees to submit to
binding arbitration by moderators-advice at UUNET. This situation covers
true interpretive controversy, as well as such technical scenarios as: only
two moderators, one wanting to remove the other; so many moderators on
extended leave or genuinely unresponsive that the active panel cannot
remove them to get on with business, etc.

6. Any votes or motions may be called into question by moderators returning
from leaves of absence, though these ballots may be counted as abstentions
in the interim.

7. All prospective moderators must agree to abide by these guidelines in
their entirety before consideration for moderator status. By acting as a
moderator, this point is implied, regardless of written confirmation.

Changes:

It requires unanimous approval of the moderation panel to change these
guidelines; and, they must remain within the broad outlines given in the
original CFV charter.

END CHARTER.

MODERATOR INFO: sci.philosophy.natural

Moderator: Will Wagers <[email protected]>

END MODERATOR INFO.

HOW TO VOTE

Delete everything above the top "-=-=-" line and delete everything below
the bottom -=-=-" line.  Do not change anything between these lines,
except to add your name and vote.

Give your name on the line that asks for it.  For each group, put your
vote in the brackets next to the group name.  Valid entries are ABSTAIN,
CANCEL, NO, and YES.  Anything else may generate an invalid vote.  Don't
worry about changes in spacing or any quote characters (">") that your
reply may insert.

Mail the ballot to <[email protected]>.  Just replying
to this should work, but check the "To:" line.  Votes must be mailed
directly from the voter to the votetaker.  Distributing pre-marked or
otherwise edited ballots is considered vote fraud.

Only one vote is allowed per person or per account.  Votes will be
acknowleged by e-mail.  If you have not received an acknowledgement within
a few days, contact the votetaker.  It is your responsibility to be
certain your vote has been recorded correctly.  If you want to change your
vote, you may vote again, but only the latest vote will be counted.
Addresses and votes of all voters will be published in the final vote ack.

The purpose of a Usenet vote is to determine the genuine interest of
people who would read a proposed newsgroup.  Soliciting votes from
disinterested parties defeats this purpose.  Please do not distribute this
CFV.  If you must, direct people to the official CFV as posted in
news.groups.  When in doubt, ask the votetaker.

-=-=- BEGINNING OF BALLOT: DELETE EVERYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE =-=-=-=-=-=-=
This ballot is available only from      |      FIRST CALL FOR VOTES      |
postings in news.groups or by e-mail    |     SCI.PHILOSOPHY.NATURAL     |
from the votetaker.  It is distributed  |         <SPN-0001>             |
blank.  Votes are counted by computer,  ==================================
and failure to use this ballot increases the possibility that the software
will be unable to process your vote properly.  Do not edit this ballot
except to add your name and indicate your vote.

These are examples of how to mark the ballot.  Do not vote here.
[   YES   ] example.yes.vote
[   NO    ] example.no.vote
[ ABSTAIN ] example.abstain.vote
[ CANCEL  ] example.cancel.vote

The placement of the word within the brackets is not important, but use the
complete word, not just one letter.

Enter your name and indicate your vote in the spaces below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Give your real name here:
If you do not give your real name, your vote may be rejected.

[Your Vote]  Group (Place your vote in the brackets next to the group)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
[         ]  sci.philosophy.natural
-=-=-=-=  END OF BALLOT: DELETE EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE  =-=-=-=-=-=-=

DISTRIBUTION:

In addition to the groups named in the Newsgroups: header, information
about the CFV will be mailed to the following mailing lists.

ANCIEN-L, ANE, ARCH-L, H-IDEAS, INDOEUROPEAN-L, INDOLOGY, ISLAM-L,
LEUCIPPUS, LITSCI-L, LT-ANTIQ, MEDSCI-L, SSREL-L, THEOLOG-L.

From [email protected] Mon Dec  4 09:40:49 1995
Path: uunet!bounce-back
From: David Bostwick <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,alt.archaeology,alt.mythology,sci.anthropology,sci.archaeology,sci.astro,soc.history
Subject: 2nd CFV: sci.philosophy.natural moderated
Supersedes: <[email protected]>
Followup-To: poster
Date: 4 Dec 1995 14:40:43 -0000
Organization: Usenet Volunteer Votetakers
Lines: 279
Sender: [email protected]
Approved: [email protected]
Expires: 13 Dec 1995 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-To: David Bostwick <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rodan.uu.net
Archive-Name: sci.philosophy.natural
Xref: uunet news.announce.newgroups:7968 news.groups:177622 alt.archaeology:1872 alt.mythology:22989 sci.anthropology:20109 sci.archaeology:34455 sci.astro:110522 soc.history:61879

                      LAST CALL FOR VOTES (of 2)
                moderated group sci.philosophy.natural

Newsgroups line:
sci.philosophy.natural	Ancient natural philosophy. (Moderated)

Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC, 12 Dec 1995.

This vote is being conducted by a neutral third party.  Questions about
the proposed group should be directed to the proponent.

Proponent: Will Wagers <[email protected]>
Mentor:  Mark James <[email protected]>
Votetaker: David Bostwick <[email protected]>

RATIONALE: sci.philosophy.natural

sci.philosophy.natural will meet a long-standing demand for a moderated
newsgroup for the scholarly discussion of and publications on ancient
natural philosophy (science) without flames and without unfounded
'speculative' postings. The proposed newsgroup would not replace any
existing groups. There is a small overlap with *many* existing newsgroups
and mailing lists in that subjects appropriate to sci.philosophy.natural
are occasionally discussed there. One purpose of sci.philosophy.natural is
to bring these discussions under one roof to facilitate interdisciplinary
scholarship. In some cases, this may result in offloading some traffic from
high volume newsgroups and mailing lists. It would still leave any and all
posters the forums that currently exist, so there is no question of denying
anyone an outlet for their ideas. The small number of newsgroups and
mailing lists which regularly deal with topics appropriate to
sci.philosophy.natural may regard the proposed newsgroup as a means of
publishing finished articles after the rounds of specialist comment and
criticism have occurred.

Minority viewpoints are seldom embraced and are often actively discouraged
on many specialist moderated newsgroups and mailing lists which are
dominated by a small group of established "experts". sci.philosophy.natural
welcomes minority and controversial viewpoints which are *justified by
scholarship and which pass moderation*.

The number of potential readers is difficult to estimate due to the
interdisciplinary nature of the group. However, a small survey for a single
subject area encompassed by sci.philosophy.natural drew 132 interested
readers or contributors. Many mailing lists from which
sci.philosophy.natural would draw participation have 300+ members.

CHARTER: sci.philosophy.natural

sci.philosophy.natural shall be a moderated newsgroup dedicated to the
discussion of and publications on ancient natural philosophy. All
viewpoints and levels of knowledge are welcome, subject to the moderation
policy described below. Because natural philosophy is such a broad subject
and because lively debate on issues is encouraged, this group is moderated
by a panel. Prospective articles are assigned to a moderator with skills
appropriate for approval. This method will hopefully lead to the fastest
turn-around time and least intrusion possible. Articles will *not* be
rejected based on whether the moderator(s) disagree with the views
expressed. The text itself will either be accepted as-is or rejected. In
some cases, the moderator may suggest changes.

Moderation policy:

* Articles may be full-length or extracts, requests for information,
announcements of relevance, etc. Lengthy quotation (more than 30 lines) of
source material must be accompanied by commentary or by other text which
ties it to on-going discussions. Articles which quote substantially the
same source material repetitively will not be approved. Articles consisting
of materials which are available on-line at ftp or WWW sites will not be
approved, rather pointers to sites may be given. Moderator(s) may waive
this rule at their discretion.

* Articles which contain personal attacks of any sort will not be approved
for posting.

* Articles which confuse politics with other subjects will be refused.

* Flameless disagreements are welcome; but, if a thread looks as though
it's never going to be resolved, the moderator(s) reserve the right to
terminate it or suspend it until new evidence is produced.

* Blank messages, test messages, advertisements, MAKE.MONEY.FAST, binaries,
uuencoded messages, and so forth, will not be approved posting.

* This is *not* a forum for the discussion of purely 'speculative' works,
such as those of Von Daniken, etc. So if you want to post something arguing
that aliens built the Pyramids, expect it to be rejected unless you can
offer citations from accepted professional journals. You will still have
the existing news groups in which to post.

* Moderator(s) may, at their discretion, change the Subject: lines for
threads which have strayed from the initial subject.

* Articles which include excessive quoting (e.g. an article which quotes an
entire other article in order to add a few comments at the end) will be
trimmed by the moderator(s).

* An article *must* have a valid reply-to address or it will not be
approved for posting.

* Cross-posting is strongly discouraged and requires a compelling reason
for approval.

* Rejected articles which would be acceptable after editing will be
returned to the poster with an explanation and suggestions for change.
Articles rejected for other reasons may be shared with the other moderators
for group consideration if the poster wishes to appeal.

* Any article that contains more than fifty percent quoted material (and
the author's signature shall not count as original material for purposes of
determining the proportion) may be trimmed or rejected at the discretion of
the moderator(s). In exercising this discretion, the moderator(s) shall
take readability considerations into account, such as the amount of quoted
material at the beginning of the message, and the size of the blocks of
quoted material. If the entire length of the article (excluding header and
signature) is less than 24 lines of 80 characters, then the requirement of
50% original material may be waived at the moderator's discretion.

* In keeping with Usenet netiquette conventions, signatures should be
restricted to 5 lines. Moderators may, at their discretion, trim signatures
to four lines before posting articles. Signatures may not sport commercial,
political, obscene, or contentious figures or slogans.

* Scholarly postings are considered the intellectual property of the
poster. If you intend to quote original material, e.g. to another newsgroup
or mailing list, permission must be sought from the original poster.

Moderators:

The proposer of the group is the initial moderator and is responsible for
recruiting others. If the number of moderators fall below four (4),
volunteers will be solicited. An automatic script will be used to share
postings among the moderators.

It is important to have a clear policy to cover the possibility that there
is conflict in the affairs of the moderation panel itself. It is generally
believed that moderators will come and go throughout the course of the
group, and in all cases the goal will be a consensus amongst the panel
regarding the addition of new moderators. A standard group decision process
will be followed: a motion will be made to add a new moderator, and if
there are no objections it will go ahead. Friendly relations are certainly
expected.

If there is an objection to a motion, and a group decision is not reached
by discussion, a vote can be carried out in accordance with the statements
below. In any of the following cases, a secret ballot may be requested --
and if a suitable (meaning: agreeably neutral) volunteer on the panel to
collect the ballots cannot be found, will be carried out via point #5 below
-- but voting will generally be public (within the confines of the
moderation panel itself).

1. If it comes to a vote, new moderators must be approved by a
supermajority (75% rounded downward, ie. two out of three moderators, eight
out of eleven moderators, nine out of twelve moderators, etc.) amongst the
moderation panel. Abstentions will not affect the outcome of this vote,
meaning that a supermajority among voting moderators must be obtained. In
the case of only two voting moderators who disagree, the prospective
moderator will not be added.

2. Moderators who will be unavailable for more than a week are expected to
have their names removed from the active file for that period. This implies
no permanent change in status, and they will be simply returned to active
duty afterward.

3. New moderators will be considered if the number of moderators falls
below four, or if several moderators have taken extended leaves of absence.
In the latter case, any new moderators will be "temporary" unless accepted
by the returning members of the moderation panel. Additional "temporary"
moderators will be added as required to handle various specialities, e.g.
ancient mathematics, ancient physics, archaeoastronomy, linguistics, etc.
If the volume of submissions warrants, such "temporary" moderators will be
made permanent. People named as successors by retiring moderators will
generally be given preference.

4. Moderators can be removed by a supermajority (as above) vote amongst the
moderation panel (including the moderator in question). Abstentions will
count as votes against removal.

5. If there is controversy amongst the moderators concerning the
application of these guidelines, the moderation panel agrees to submit to
binding arbitration by moderators-advice at UUNET. This situation covers
true interpretive controversy, as well as such technical scenarios as: only
two moderators, one wanting to remove the other; so many moderators on
extended leave or genuinely unresponsive that the active panel cannot
remove them to get on with business, etc.

6. Any votes or motions may be called into question by moderators returning
from leaves of absence, though these ballots may be counted as abstentions
in the interim.

7. All prospective moderators must agree to abide by these guidelines in
their entirety before consideration for moderator status. By acting as a
moderator, this point is implied, regardless of written confirmation.

Changes:

It requires unanimous approval of the moderation panel to change these
guidelines; and, they must remain within the broad outlines given in the
original CFV charter.

END CHARTER.

MODERATOR INFO: sci.philosophy.natural

Moderator: Will Wagers <[email protected]>

END MODERATOR INFO.

HOW TO VOTE

Delete everything above the top "-=-=-" line and delete everything below
the bottom -=-=-" line.  Do not change anything between these lines,
except to add your name and vote.

Give your name on the line that asks for it.  For each group, put your
vote in the brackets next to the group name.  Valid entries are ABSTAIN,
CANCEL, NO, and YES.  Anything else may generate an invalid vote.  Don't
worry about changes in spacing or any quote characters (">") that your
reply may insert.

Mail the ballot to <[email protected]>.  Just replying
to this should work, but check the "To:" line.  Votes must be mailed
directly from the voter to the votetaker.  Distributing pre-marked or
otherwise edited ballots is considered vote fraud.

Only one vote is allowed per person or per account.  Votes will be
acknowleged by e-mail.  If you have not received an acknowledgement within
a few days, contact the votetaker.  It is your responsibility to be
certain your vote has been recorded correctly.  If you want to change your
vote, you may vote again, but only the latest vote will be counted.
Addresses and votes of all voters will be published in the final vote ack.

The purpose of a Usenet vote is to determine the genuine interest of
people who would read a proposed newsgroup.  Soliciting votes from
disinterested parties defeats this purpose.  Please do not distribute this
CFV.  If you must, direct people to the official CFV as posted in
news.groups.  When in doubt, ask the votetaker.

-=-=- BEGINNING OF BALLOT: DELETE EVERYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE =-=-=-=-=-=-=
This ballot is available only from      |       LAST CALL FOR VOTES      |
postings in news.groups or by e-mail    |     SCI.PHILOSOPHY.NATURAL     |
from the votetaker.  It is distributed  |         <SPN-0002>             |
blank.  Votes are counted by computer,  ==================================
and failure to use this ballot increases the possibility that the software
will be unable to process your vote properly.  Do not edit this ballot
except to add your name and indicate your vote.

These are examples of how to mark the ballot.  Do not vote here.
[   YES   ] example.yes.vote
[   NO    ] example.no.vote
[ ABSTAIN ] example.abstain.vote
[ CANCEL  ] example.cancel.vote

The placement of the word within the brackets is not important, but use the
complete word, not just one letter.

Enter your name and indicate your vote in the spaces below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Give your real name here:
If you do not give your real name, your vote may be rejected.

[Your Vote]  Group (Place your vote in the brackets next to the group)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
[         ]  sci.philosophy.natural
-=-=-=-=  END OF BALLOT: DELETE EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE  =-=-=-=-=-=-=

DISTRIBUTION:

In addition to the groups named in the Newsgroups: header, information
about the CFV will be mailed to the following mailing lists.

ANCIEN-L, ANE, ARCH-L, H-IDEAS, INDOEUROPEAN-L, INDOLOGY, ISLAM-L,
LEUCIPPUS, LITSCI-L, LT-ANTIQ, MEDSCI-L, SSREL-L, THEOLOG-L.

sci.philosophy.natural Bounce List - These votes have been counted
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[email protected]                  Eleanor Robson
[email protected]                                      Brett Holman
[email protected]                                          Mikko J. Levanto

From [email protected] Fri Dec 15 11:27:16 1995
Path: uunet!bounce-back
From: David Bostwick <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,alt.archaeology,alt.mythology,sci.anthropology,sci.archaeology,sci.astro,soc.history
Subject: RESULT: sci.philosophy.natural moderated fails 101:41
Supersedes: <[email protected]>
Followup-To: news.groups
Date: 15 Dec 1995 11:27:13 -0500
Organization: Usenet Volunteer Votetakers
Lines: 394
Sender: [email protected]
Approved: [email protected]
Expires: 13 Dec 1995 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>,<[email protected]>
Reply-To: David Bostwick <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rodan.uu.net
Archive-Name: sci.philosophy.natural
Xref: uunet news.announce.newgroups:8016 news.groups:179264 alt.archaeology:1996 alt.mythology:23420 sci.anthropology:20324 sci.archaeology:34942 sci.astro:111646 soc.history:62500

                                RESULT
         moderated group sci.philosophy.natural fails 101:41

There were 101 YES votes and 41 NO votes, for a total of 142 valid votes.
There was 1 abstain and 6 invalid ballots.

For group passage, YES votes must be at least 2/3 of all valid (YES and NO)
votes.   There also must be at least 100 more YES votes than NO votes.

There is a five day discussion period after these results are posted.
Unless serious allegations of voting irregularities are raised, the group may
not be voted on again for six months.

Newsgroups line:
sci.philosophy.natural	Ancient natural philosophy. (Moderated)

The voting period ended at 23:59:59 UTC, 12 Dec 1995.

This vote was conducted by a neutral third party.  Questions about
the proposed group should be directed to the proponent.

Proponent: Will Wagers <[email protected]>
Mentor:  Mark James <[email protected]>
Votetaker: David Bostwick <[email protected]>

RATIONALE: sci.philosophy.natural

sci.philosophy.natural will meet a long-standing demand for a moderated
newsgroup for the scholarly discussion of and publications on ancient
natural philosophy (science) without flames and without unfounded
'speculative' postings. The proposed newsgroup would not replace any
existing groups. There is a small overlap with *many* existing newsgroups
and mailing lists in that subjects appropriate to sci.philosophy.natural
are occasionally discussed there. One purpose of sci.philosophy.natural is
to bring these discussions under one roof to facilitate interdisciplinary
scholarship. In some cases, this may result in offloading some traffic from
high volume newsgroups and mailing lists. It would still leave any and all
posters the forums that currently exist, so there is no question of denying
anyone an outlet for their ideas. The small number of newsgroups and
mailing lists which regularly deal with topics appropriate to
sci.philosophy.natural may regard the proposed newsgroup as a means of
publishing finished articles after the rounds of specialist comment and
criticism have occurred.

Minority viewpoints are seldom embraced and are often actively discouraged
on many specialist moderated newsgroups and mailing lists which are
dominated by a small group of established "experts". sci.philosophy.natural
welcomes minority and controversial viewpoints which are *justified by
scholarship and which pass moderation*.

The number of potential readers is difficult to estimate due to the
interdisciplinary nature of the group. However, a small survey for a single
subject area encompassed by sci.philosophy.natural drew 132 interested
readers or contributors. Many mailing lists from which
sci.philosophy.natural would draw participation have 300+ members.

CHARTER: sci.philosophy.natural

sci.philosophy.natural shall be a moderated newsgroup dedicated to the
discussion of and publications on ancient natural philosophy. All
viewpoints and levels of knowledge are welcome, subject to the moderation
policy described below. Because natural philosophy is such a broad subject
and because lively debate on issues is encouraged, this group is moderated
by a panel. Prospective articles are assigned to a moderator with skills
appropriate for approval. This method will hopefully lead to the fastest
turn-around time and least intrusion possible. Articles will *not* be
rejected based on whether the moderator(s) disagree with the views
expressed. The text itself will either be accepted as-is or rejected. In
some cases, the moderator may suggest changes.

Moderation policy:

* Articles may be full-length or extracts, requests for information,
announcements of relevance, etc. Lengthy quotation (more than 30 lines) of
source material must be accompanied by commentary or by other text which
ties it to on-going discussions. Articles which quote substantially the
same source material repetitively will not be approved. Articles consisting
of materials which are available on-line at ftp or WWW sites will not be
approved, rather pointers to sites may be given. Moderator(s) may waive
this rule at their discretion.

* Articles which contain personal attacks of any sort will not be approved
for posting.

* Articles which confuse politics with other subjects will be refused.

* Flameless disagreements are welcome; but, if a thread looks as though
it's never going to be resolved, the moderator(s) reserve the right to
terminate it or suspend it until new evidence is produced.

* Blank messages, test messages, advertisements, MAKE.MONEY.FAST, binaries,
uuencoded messages, and so forth, will not be approved posting.

* This is *not* a forum for the discussion of purely 'speculative' works,
such as those of Von Daniken, etc. So if you want to post something arguing
that aliens built the Pyramids, expect it to be rejected unless you can
offer citations from accepted professional journals. You will still have
the existing news groups in which to post.

* Moderator(s) may, at their discretion, change the Subject: lines for
threads which have strayed from the initial subject.

* Articles which include excessive quoting (e.g. an article which quotes an
entire other article in order to add a few comments at the end) will be
trimmed by the moderator(s).

* An article *must* have a valid reply-to address or it will not be
approved for posting.

* Cross-posting is strongly discouraged and requires a compelling reason
for approval.

* Rejected articles which would be acceptable after editing will be
returned to the poster with an explanation and suggestions for change.
Articles rejected for other reasons may be shared with the other moderators
for group consideration if the poster wishes to appeal.

* Any article that contains more than fifty percent quoted material (and
the author's signature shall not count as original material for purposes of
determining the proportion) may be trimmed or rejected at the discretion of
the moderator(s). In exercising this discretion, the moderator(s) shall
take readability considerations into account, such as the amount of quoted
material at the beginning of the message, and the size of the blocks of
quoted material. If the entire length of the article (excluding header and
signature) is less than 24 lines of 80 characters, then the requirement of
50% original material may be waived at the moderator's discretion.

* In keeping with Usenet netiquette conventions, signatures should be
restricted to 5 lines. Moderators may, at their discretion, trim signatures
to four lines before posting articles. Signatures may not sport commercial,
political, obscene, or contentious figures or slogans.

* Scholarly postings are considered the intellectual property of the
poster. If you intend to quote original material, e.g. to another newsgroup
or mailing list, permission must be sought from the original poster.

Moderators:

The proposer of the group is the initial moderator and is responsible for
recruiting others. If the number of moderators fall below four (4),
volunteers will be solicited. An automatic script will be used to share
postings among the moderators.

It is important to have a clear policy to cover the possibility that there
is conflict in the affairs of the moderation panel itself. It is generally
believed that moderators will come and go throughout the course of the
group, and in all cases the goal will be a consensus amongst the panel
regarding the addition of new moderators. A standard group decision process
will be followed: a motion will be made to add a new moderator, and if
there are no objections it will go ahead. Friendly relations are certainly
expected.

If there is an objection to a motion, and a group decision is not reached
by discussion, a vote can be carried out in accordance with the statements
below. In any of the following cases, a secret ballot may be requested --
and if a suitable (meaning: agreeably neutral) volunteer on the panel to
collect the ballots cannot be found, will be carried out via point #5 below
-- but voting will generally be public (within the confines of the
moderation panel itself).

1. If it comes to a vote, new moderators must be approved by a
supermajority (75% rounded downward, ie. two out of three moderators, eight
out of eleven moderators, nine out of twelve moderators, etc.) amongst the
moderation panel. Abstentions will not affect the outcome of this vote,
meaning that a supermajority among voting moderators must be obtained. In
the case of only two voting moderators who disagree, the prospective
moderator will not be added.

2. Moderators who will be unavailable for more than a week are expected to
have their names removed from the active file for that period. This implies
no permanent change in status, and they will be simply returned to active
duty afterward.

3. New moderators will be considered if the number of moderators falls
below four, or if several moderators have taken extended leaves of absence.
In the latter case, any new moderators will be "temporary" unless accepted
by the returning members of the moderation panel. Additional "temporary"
moderators will be added as required to handle various specialities, e.g.
ancient mathematics, ancient physics, archaeoastronomy, linguistics, etc.
If the volume of submissions warrants, such "temporary" moderators will be
made permanent. People named as successors by retiring moderators will
generally be given preference.

4. Moderators can be removed by a supermajority (as above) vote amongst the
moderation panel (including the moderator in question). Abstentions will
count as votes against removal.

5. If there is controversy amongst the moderators concerning the
application of these guidelines, the moderation panel agrees to submit to
binding arbitration by moderators-advice at UUNET. This situation covers
true interpretive controversy, as well as such technical scenarios as: only
two moderators, one wanting to remove the other; so many moderators on
extended leave or genuinely unresponsive that the active panel cannot
remove them to get on with business, etc.

6. Any votes or motions may be called into question by moderators returning
>from  leaves of absence, though these ballots may be counted as abstentions
in the interim.

7. All prospective moderators must agree to abide by these guidelines in
their entirety before consideration for moderator status. By acting as a
moderator, this point is implied, regardless of written confirmation.

Changes:

It requires unanimous approval of the moderation panel to change these
guidelines; and, they must remain within the broad outlines given in the
original CFV charter.

END CHARTER.

MODERATOR INFO: sci.philosophy.natural

Moderator: Will Wagers <[email protected]>

END MODERATOR INFO.

DISTRIBUTION:

In addition to the groups named in the Newsgroups: header, information
about the CFV will be mailed to the following mailing lists.

ANCIEN-L, ANE, ARCH-L, H-IDEAS, INDOEUROPEAN-L, INDOLOGY, ISLAM-L,
LEUCIPPUS, LITSCI-L, LT-ANTIQ, MEDSCI-L, SSREL-L, THEOLOG-L.

sci.philosophy.natural Final Vote Ack

Voted Yes
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[email protected]                                        Mike Bispham
[email protected]                                               Mick Taylor
[email protected]                                                 John Missing
[email protected]                                                 Allen W. Thrasher
[email protected]                                         Mike Bagneski
[email protected]                                                   Jeff P Gassaway
[email protected]                                         Dr Bruce Scott
[email protected]                                              Bob Kobres
[email protected]                                             Hermann Bluhme
[email protected]                                              Rob N. Johnson
[email protected]                                                     Jon Bosak
[email protected]                                             R Brzustowicz
[email protected]                                              Charles H. Camp
[email protected]                                          RICK HAUSER
[email protected]                                              Charles L Hamilton
[email protected]                                        Craig Martin Levin
[email protected]                                    Ira B. Cottrell
[email protected]                                        Doug Weller
[email protected]                                                  Hugh Swan
[email protected]                  Eleanor Robson
[email protected]                                         Elliot Richmond
[email protected]                                        Edward J. Montes
[email protected]                                                  Ernie Floyd
[email protected]                                        Gordon Fisher
[email protected]                                      Dietmar FLORIANI
[email protected]                              Georg von Simson
[email protected]                                         Paul J. Gans
[email protected]                                              George Girod
[email protected]                                         George Sullivan-Davis
[email protected]                                          James Harvey
[email protected]                                            William R Ward
[email protected]                                            Henry Groover
[email protected]                                      Brett Holman
[email protected]                                         Hope Anthony
[email protected]                                          Arlene Hopkins
[email protected]                                                     Ira Monarch
[email protected]                                                 Angelique Pearcy
[email protected]                                         Joseph Bellina
[email protected]                                            John L. King
[email protected]                                                     Jim Braun
[email protected]                                             James McGarry
[email protected]                                      jon ivar skullerud
[email protected]                                       J. Porter Clark
[email protected]                                      Kenneth I. Mayer
[email protected]                                              Kim DeVaughn
[email protected]                                                  Kathy McClure
[email protected]                                              Keith Rogers
[email protected]                                    Lance Fletcher
[email protected]                                                Lance Chun
[email protected]                                                 Lenny Gray
lfirrantello@BIX.com                                                Mick Brown
list-votes@dream.hb.north.de                                  Martin Schr"oder
mail07464@pop.net                                              Beatrice Reusch
mc3430@mclink.it                                                Gino Roncaglia
mc@prismtech.co.uk                                               M.Chidambaram
mcmahon@lemoyne.edu                                            John M. McMahon
MEZZA@beattie.uct.ac.za                           Mezzabotta, MR, Margaret, Dr
mhgeorge@hba.trumpet.com.au                          Michael Harrington-George
misc183@cantva.canterbury.ac.nz                                  Sean Broadley
misterc@students.uiuc.edu                                        Chris Clayton
mloren@newciv.org                                                  Maria Loren
mwdaniel@uiuc.edu                                                 Mike Daniels
N.Whyte@queens-belfast.ac.uk                                           n.whyte
neilt@spl.co.za                                                  Neil Thompson
norm@harpo.wh.att.com                                        Norman E. Andrews
P.Metcalfe@student.canterbury.ac.nz                             Peter Metcalfe
paxil@interlog.com                                              Trevor Tymchuk
pettsj@visigoth.demon.co.uk                                        James Petts
prinz@student.uni-kl.de                                            Petra Prinz
PruT@aol.com                                                   Anthony Rolloff
rathbone@crl.com                                                  Lois Shawver
rcarrier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu                                 Ronald M. Carrier
rcs@intergate.net                                           Richard C. Schmidt
redfid.is@office.mmc.org                                       Dennis Redfield
rellison@wrdis01.robins.af.mil                                    Rick Ellison
rjgrace@qnet.com                                              R. Jeffrey Grace
robhughes@beta.delphi.com                                           BOB HUGHES
robyrom@fusilla.abanet.it                                    Roberto Romagnoli
rufinus@mbe.ece.wisc.edu                                            J. Rufinus
rw33@cornell.edu                                                     Rega Wood
rychel@ionet.net                                                 Philip Rychel
salvador@iastate.edu                                       Ricardo J. Salvador
sasbmt@unx.sas.com                                               Bruce Tindall
scarfman@wam.umd.edu                                            Jonathan Smith
shag@emanon.net                                                   Dan Birchall
sorvari@ll.mit.edu                                              John M Sorvari
speaker@asc.org                                                  Speaker Allen
sundor96@wharton.upenn.edu                                         Adam Sundor
SWARTZ@humnet.ucla.edu                                               L. SWARTZ
tbosch@computek.net                                                 tony bosch
thegedus@epas.utoronto.ca                                          Tim Hegedus
tim@bob.bom                                                     Michael Allred
ukirku00@mcl.ucsb.edu                                  Ursula Suzanne Kirkland
vancleef@netcom.com                                             Hank van Cleef
W.Sanderson@NetAxis.qc.ca                                     Warren Sanderson
wagers@computek.net                                                Will Wagers
wellman@educ.umass.edu                                       Robert R. Wellman
wh_reid@ccmail.pnl.gov                                         Willaim H. Reid
wsnyder@powergrid.electriciti.com              William S. Snyder (Bill Snyder)
xanthian@qualcomm.com                                          Kent Paul Dolan
xine@rain.org                                              Christine Norstrand

Voted No
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
afabbro@us.itd.umich.edu                                         Andrew Fabbro
aow@mpa-garching.mpg.de                                              A.G.Weiss
balaji@nexus.yorku.ca                                                   Balaji
BOCHERC@hartwick.edu                                           Carol A. Bocher
borek@mda.ca                                                     Michael Borek
bresnab@tiac.net                                               Brian Bresnahan
bs56+@andrew.cmu.edu                                            Brian D Sammon
cohen@walrus.com                                                 Jeffrey Cohen
csaamw@urc.tue.nl                                               Michiel Wijers
David.Pfitzner@anu.edu.au                                       David Pfitzner
dballard@ix.netcom.com                                             Don Ballard
feminist@eskimo.com                                       William Affleck-Asch
fm5a012@GEOMAT.math.uni-hamburg.de                         Gerhard Wiesenfeldt
garzilli@shore.net                                             Enrica Garzilli
hck@ipp-garching.mpg.de                                       Heinrich C. Kuhn
huug@telebyte.nl                                              Hugo R. Landsman
jan.coekelberghs@ping.be                                      Jan Coekelberghs
Joerg.Plate@Informatik.Uni-Oldenburg.de                             Jvrg Plate
john@handel.jlc.net                                                John Leslie
kmitchel@direct.ca                                              Kevin Mitchell
knappen@vkpmzd.kph.Uni-Mainz.DE                                  J"org Knappen
lane@duphy4.drexel.edu                                            Charles Lane
ludo@shore.net                                           Ludovico Magnocavallo
MarkMilem@aol.com                                                   Mark Milem
mccomb@best.com                                             Todd Michel McComb
mcnab@afsmail.cern.ch                                             Andrew McNab
mentifex@scn.org                                              Arthur T. Murray
mikko.levanto@vtt.fi                                          Mikko J. Levanto
mock@hepxvt.ps.uci.edu                                            Patrick Mock
nelsonk@ix.netcom.com                                               Ken Nelson
patl@lcs.mit.edu                                           Patrick J. LoPresti
ptbast@owl.WPI.EDU                                                Pete Bastien
rick@bcm.tmc.edu                                                Richard Miller
ryang@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu                                               G. Ryan
Shrisha.Rao@lambada.oit.unc.edu                                    Shrisha Rao
smarry@turing.toronto.edu                                         Smarasderagd
stainles@bga.com                                                  Dwight Brown
stick@shepherd.escalade.com                                           J. Stick
tlawson@email.univpubs.american.edu                             Todd C. Lawson
widenius@cc.helsinki.fi                                         Risto Widenius
WISANR@hartwick.edu                                                 Dick Wisan

Abstained
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
crouchkp@flidh103.delcoelect.com                                     K. Crouch


Votes in error
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
carl@bronze.lcs.mit.edu                                         Carl Alexander
   ! No vote statement in message
hic@tiac.net                                                   Howard I. Cohen
   ! No ballot
JDZ1@delphi.com                                                David Zincavage
   ! No ballot
monteagu@rohan.sdsu.edu                                             monteagudo
   ! No ballot
paul@dciem.dnd.ca                                                  Paul Sarkar
   ! No ballot
root@quetz.g4lzv.ampr.org                                     Keith Brazington
   ! Invalid address
 
USENET FACT: Big-8
BIG-8 hierarchies are the 8 traditional top hierarchies of the Usenet. See the following page for more