RESULT moderated group rec.autos.sport.nascar.moderated passes 216:32 There were 216 YES votes and 32 NO votes, for a total of 248 valid votes. There were 3 abstentions and 4 invalid ballots. For a group to...
RESULT moderated group rec.autos.sport.nascar.moderated passes 216:32
There were 216 YES votes and 32 NO votes, for a total of 248 valid votes. There were 3 abstentions and 4 invalid ballots.
For a group to pass, YES votes must be at least 2/3 of all valid (YES and NO) votes. There must also be at least 100 more YES votes than NO votes.
A five day discussion period follows this announcement. If no serious allegations of voting irregularities are raised, the moderator of news.announce.newgroups will create the group shortly thereafter.
Newsgroups line: rec.autos.sport.nascar.moderated NASCAR and Stockcar Racing. (Moderated)
The voting period closed at 23:59:59 UTC, 7 Aug 1998.
This vote was conducted by a neutral third party. Questions about the proposed group should be directed to the proponent.
Proponent: Eric O. Troldahl <firstname.lastname@example.org> Proponent: Bob Paxton <email@example.com> Proponent: Deven Atkinson <firstname.lastname@example.org> Proponent: Rich Bemben <email@example.com> Proponent: Lisa A. Carbrey <firstname.lastname@example.org> Proponent: Tom Duwe <email@example.com> Proponent: Ronnie Hiatt <firstname.lastname@example.org> Proponent: Sue Horan-Phillips <email@example.com> Proponent: Karen Jensen <firstname.lastname@example.org> Proponent: Henry Kelley <email@example.com> Proponent: Nancy Kendrick <firstname.lastname@example.org> Proponent: Ken (Poppy) Kraus <email@example.com> Proponent: Jerry (Tinadog) Kyte <firstname.lastname@example.org> Proponent: John Martin <email@example.com> Proponent: Lynwood Matteson <firstname.lastname@example.org> Proponent: Mike McGuigan <email@example.com> Proponent: Martin Moleski <firstname.lastname@example.org> Proponent: John (DeliveryBoy) Sutphin <email@example.com> Proponent: Chris Watkins <firstname.lastname@example.org> Mentor: Jonathan Grobe <email@example.com> Votetaker: Neil Crellin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
NASCAR and stockcar racing, as well as other motorsports, have been the subjects of Usenet discussion for many years. The existing rec.autos.sport.nascar newsgroup (RASN) gets a total of well over a hundred messages a day during the off-season and that number can increase to two to four times that figure during the season, peaking at over 1000 a day during speedweeks. Much of this traffic is relevant and of high- quality, but there are also significant problems with spam, advertisements, Driver/Team/Sponsor/Car-Make/Media abuse, and attacks aimed at other posters to the newsgroup. Many former posters to RASN have left because of this situation.
Rec.autos.sport.nascar.moderated is intended to be a forum where all topics related to NASCAR and stockcar racing can be discussed without these distractions. The primary focus of the group will be NASCAR's top 3 series: Winston Cup, Busch Grand National, and Craftsman Trucks. Questions and answers about this sport will be welcomed and a FAQ will be maintained.
The unmoderated newsgroup rec.autos.sport.nascar has always been fairly relaxed about what is on-topic. The moderated newsgroup will be the same way. Basically anything related to NASCAR or stock car racing will be considered on-topic.
Posts about other types of motorsports (Indycar, F1, etc.) should be directed to the appropriate newsgroup, unless they are comparing stockcar racing to the other motorsport. For example, a comparison of the point systems of F1 and Winston Cup, and how using the F1 system would change the Winston Cup championship standings, is on-topic.
The goal of rec.autos.sport.nascar.moderated (r.a.s.n.m) is to provide its participants with a degree of free expression approaching that found in unmoderated groups while maintaining an environment free of the spam, commercial and money-making posts, personal harassment, vulgarity and blatantly off topic material found in most unmoderated forums.
The philosophy of r.a.s.n.m is that responsible people should be trusted to post like responsible adults. Therefore, the moderation effort will focus primarily on dealing with problems as they occur, not on screening every post. All posters will be initially trusted with auto-approve status, which will enable their subsequent articles to be posted immediately to the newsgroup without the involvement of a human moderator. They will retain auto-approve status unless they demonstrate cause for its revocation.
Newsgroup readers are warned that since this is a discussion group about racing, people here will want to talk about racing, even during the televised races. If you want your tape-delayed viewing to be unspoiled by knowing who won, crashed, etc., it is best to keep yourself away from all sources of racing information, including newsgroups, cable TV, racing radio shows, newspapers, coworkers, etc. It is considered polite to include the word SPOILER in the subject of posts about races less than 48 hours old, leaving discussion of the details out of the header, but this WILL NOT be enforced.
Appropriate posts will meet one of the following criteria:
1. It would effectively start a new discussion. Examples:
- What is the current points system? - How do provisionals work? - How did Ricky Craven get an 8th provisional? - Discussions of actual Race or Qualifying action. - Questions about the mechanics of race cars and engines.
2. It adds content to an existing discussion. Examples:
- Points breakdown itself. - Actual NASCAR policy on provisionals. - Web site addresses of teams, drivers, or Fan Clubs. - Answers to questions posed by others. - Clarification of questions previously asked.
3. It is informative to the r.a.s.n.m community. Examples:
- Announcements of r.a.s.n reunions. - Announcements of upcoming TV schedules for racing. - Testing times. - Announcements of NASCAR events or schedules. - Announcements of driver appearances.
While examples are given wherever possible, it is impossible to anticipate every attempt at finding a loophole. Therefore, the spirit of all the rules should be followed as opposed to looking for leaks and loopholes. For example, strange spellings or formats of profanity would still be considered profanity. Posters will be treated like responsible adults and expected to act accordingly.
The following are unacceptable:
1) Bashing 2) Flames 3) Trolls 4) Commercial and Money-Making Posts 5) Profanity/Racial Slurs 6) Crossposts 7) Binaries 8) Posts without a respondable email address 9) Quotes of more than a few lines of copyrighted material
1) Bashing - defined as posts or portions of posts that verbally attack others in an insulting or malicious manner to an extent that would reasonably be considered libelous or slanderous. In other words: "Do not post anything that would make the driver or team you support cringe or be embarrassed to have you as a fan." This does NOT mean that negative comments will be moderated out. The expression of negative opinions is a legitimate part of any discussion and the right to express them in a non-malicious fashion shall not be abridged.
2) Flames - defined as inflammatory posts or portions of posts whose primary purpose is to induce an intense emotional response.
3) Trolls - Trolls are defined as posts that do not have substance to their content, primarily meant to incite disruptive threads or distract posters from the main intent of the newsgroup.
4) Commercial and Money-Making Posts are defined as posts whose primary purpose is to solicit a benefit for the poster. This would include, but is not limited to, advertisements of businesses, direct advertisements of goods and/or services for sale, posts advertising the availability of goods and/or services for sale through another medium, promotion of business opportunities, money-making schemes, and chain letters.
Simply listing a business name, address, phone number, URL, etc. in one's signature is not considered commercial use of the newsgroup. However, signatures that are in fact advertisements, or which solicit readers to patronize a for-profit venture or visit a commercial web site fall under the definition of commercial or money-making posts. Posts bearing such signatures are subject to rejection as such.
Posts promoting newsgroup related activities are not considered commercial or money-making posts since there is no financial benefit to any of the individuals involved. These activities would include but are not limited to the RASN Sponsorship Fund, raffles, and RASN reunions.
Posts advising the group of charitable racing-related events or offering NASCAR event or NASCAR/stockcar race tickets at or below face value are also permitted.
5) Profanity/Racial Slurs - Posters should view r.a.s.n.m as polite mixed company and watch their language accordingly. Only a short list of words will be disallowed. Nevertheless, posters to RASNM are advised and encouraged to use the same standards that apply in the Sunday comics. Specifically, changing all letters in profanity to special characters like !@#$% . However, when quoting material such as scanner bites, interviews etc.., the first letter of the word may be left in place so that readers can deduce what was actually said.
6) Crossposts - defined as posts also directed to any other newsgroup. Exceptions to this limit are made for Usenet Administrative purposes (as from news.announce.newgroups) and for posts from rec.autos.sport.info.
7) Binaries - Binary posts are defined as posts that include UUencoded, MIME-encoded, or any other form of binary message in the body or signature other than Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) signatures. This includes, but is not limited to, pictures, audio files, executables, and HTML. Binaries should be posted to an appropriate binaries newsgroup or a web page. A brief informative notice should then be sent to the newsgroup. The FAQ for this group will list any web sites that have volunteered to have binaries posted from r.a.s.n.m readers, and how to get the binary posted.
8) Email Addresses - Since an author's first post to r.a.s.n.m generates an auto-response detailing the registration procedure, it is strongly recommended that at least the first submission to the group carry a valid return e-mail address. This will avoid a delay in the registration process that would result if the auto-response bounces. A person may register to post under a "munged" address to defeat spambots, but the altered address must be readily decipherable into the poster's valid address by a human. This does not cut off the use of pseudonymous remailers or munged headers, both of which are allowable..
9) Copyrighted material - Quoting a line or two of copyrighted material is not against the law. However, quoting entire articles is a copyright violation (unless the poster has permission from the copyright holder). If articles are available on the web, a short summary of the article with a URL is the accepted method of posting. Proper credit must be given to all copyrighted material.
The following are discouraged, but will not be rejected outright.
1) Posts in languages other than English 2) Signatures over 6 lines 3) Posts with difficult to read formatting 4) Posts only containing questions answered completely in the FAQ
1) Non-English - At this time, 100% of the readers of the group know English, with English being the only language of most readers. Therefore, English is strongly recommended as the posting language of choice for r.a.s.n.m. Posts in languages other than English will be examined for approval if any of the moderators can read the language in question. There is no guarantee of approval for posts in any language other than English.
2) Signatures - USENET netiquette limits signatures to four lines. For r.a.s.n.m, posters are encouraged to keep their signatures to six lines or less. PGP signature data and additional lines automatically added by services such as hotmail and Deja News are not included in the count, but all other text, including boxes around the signature, is included.
3) Readability - USENET Netiquette says that for everyone's enjoyment, all posts should have right margins in the 60-70 range. The range from 60-70 is for unquoted text. Quoted text may continue to expand to the right. Also, over 2/3 text quoted from previous posters is strongly discouraged. If a poster regularly fails to meet these simple rules, a moderator will contact the person to find out if they can fix the problem.
4) FAQ - Posters asking questions that are covered completely in the FAQ will be sent a copy of the FAQ and the post will be accepted. Other posters are encouraged to welcome the user, respond to the post, or remain silent.
Moderation procedure - To reduce their workload and expedite the posting of articles to the group, the moderation team will employ automated moderation software (robo-moderation). As much of the work as possible will be turned over to the moderation software. This software will scan each incoming article, then either post it directly to the group without human review, return it to the author with an appropriate explanation, or forward it to a human moderator. Posts will either be accepted in whole, or rejected. The moderators will NEVER modify them at all.
All rejected posts will be returned to the originating email address with an explanation for the rejection and instructions for appealing the rejection. The moderators cannot be held accountable for internet failures or undeliverable email.
Auto-rejection: binaries, crossposts, profanity, racial slurs, and articles from authors on the auto-reject list will be automatically rejected. The moderation team will maintain a list of words that will cause a post to be automatically rejected. In the spirit of allowing as much free expression as possible, the list will be as short as possible while still insuring a civil environment within the group.
Auto-kickout: There will be another short list of potentially offensive words that will cause a post to be kicked out for human moderation. These lists can be modified as needed by a simple majority vote of the moderators. Posters may explicitly request human moderation of an article by placing the special phrase MOD-HUMAN in the subject line. This may be desirable if the author feels there may be something in the article that would cause the moderation software to automatically reject it. The moderators can also add this tag to a thread.
Auto-approve: Provided an article does not trigger an auto-rejection or auto-kickout, articles from authors on the auto-approve list will be posted directly to the group without human review.
Moderation sequence: All incoming articles will be moderated according to the following sequence with steps 1-4 being performed by the moderation software.
1. Is the author a first time poster? Yes - Initiate the registration process (see below) No - Continue
2. Is there an auto-kickout? Yes - Forward the article to a human moderator (goto step 5) No - Continue
3. Are there grounds for auto-rejection? Yes - Return the article to the author with an explanation for the rejection. No - Continue
4. Is the author on the auto-approve list? Yes - Post the article to the newsgroup No - Forward the article to a human moderator (goto step 5)
5. Does the article meet the charter guidelines? Yes - Post the article to the newsgroup No - Return the article to the author with an explanation for the rejection.
r.a.s.n.m registration: When the moderation software detects an article from a first time poster, an auto-response containing the charter, FAQ and instructions for completing the registration are returned to the author. The article is forwarded to a human moderator. Should the auto-response bounce back to a moderator and a valid reply-to address for the author cannot be determined, the registration cannot be completed and the initial article will not be posted. If the moderator can determine a valid address, they will forward the registration information to the author's valid address.
When the author acknowledges by return e-mail that he/she has read the material and agrees to abide by the charter, he/she is placed on the auto- approve list. If the initial article is on charter, it is posted at that time.
Human moderation: Individual moderators will have the authority to reject articles that are clearly off-charter (commercial or money-making posts, etc.), and to accept articles that are clearly on-charter. Should there be any question about an article being reviewed, it will be forwarded to another moderator for a second opinion. If the first two moderators to review an article agree, it will be accepted or rejected accordingly. If the first two moderators to review an article disagree, the article will be forwarded to a third moderator for a deciding vote.
Moderators will execute the above procedure as rapidly as possible in order to minimize the delay in getting human moderated articles posted.
Key to the moderation philosophy, articles will not be rejected because of the author's opinion or position on an issue, nor will any human moderated post be rejected because of the author of the post. Moderator's opinions will be expressed only within their own posts, not within their moderation activities. Anyone who is willing to follow the Charter guidelines is welcome to post to r.a.s.n.m, and their posts will be accepted unedited if they have followed the Charter criteria. Posts will never be edited by moderators.
If a moderator discovers off-charter material posted in the group, he/she has three options:
1) Ignore it if it isn't blatant 2) Send an e-mail reminder of charter guidelines to the poster 3) Temporary removal of the poster's auto-post status
How the off-charter post is handled will be determined by what response the situation warrants, but the moderator should use restraint whenever possible and use removal of auto-post status only as a last resort. In the event that the moderator feels the situation is severe enough to warrant temporarily suspending the author's auto-approve privilege, the moderator must immediately notify the other moderators and forward a copy of the post to the rest of the moderation team. The moderation team must then decide within one week whether to restore the author to auto-approve or continue the suspension. A two-thirds majority is required to maintain the suspension. Posters suspended from auto-approve may continue to post, but all their articles will be subject to human moderation while the suspension is in effect. Auto-approve may be restored at any time by a simple majority vote of the moderators.
A poster who consistently submits off-charter material may be placed on the auto-reject list by a two-thirds majority vote of the moderators. Posters placed on auto-reject for this reason will be sent a copy of the charter, FAQ and instructions on how to petition for reinstatement.
Individuals who engage in threatening or abusive behavior toward a moderator, or who attempt to interfere with the normal operation of the newsgroup or the internet accounts supporting the newsgroup or it's members, other than reporting net-abuse, will be placed on auto-reject for not less than one year.
Moderator administration and changes: The moderation team will initially plan to include 5 to 7 moderators. They will be responsible for maintaining the moderation software and reviewing articles that are neither auto-approved nor auto-rejected. New moderators can be added as deemed appropriate upon the approval of two-thirds of the existing moderators. Candidates for new moderators will only be taken from those people who have been on the auto-approve list continuously for 3 months. During the first 3 months of the newsgroup, the 3 month requirement will be waived. A special call for volunteers can be posted when an existing moderator steps down or when the workload on the moderators is deemed sufficient that they feel it is appropriate to increase their number.
There will be an administrative mailing list, on which the moderators can discuss the enforcement and modification of the guidelines given here.
A thread may be marked for human attention upon agreement of a majority of the moderators. This overrides normal auto-approval and content based auto-rejection, and brings all posts in the thread to moderator attention so potential problems can be dealt with before measures as drastic as removal of auto-approval status are called for. Notice of thread marking may be posted to the newsgroup, but is not required.
Appeals: A poster who feels that a rejected post was within the charter can appeal to the administrative list. If a majority of the moderators agree that the post should be approved, it will be posted as usual. If the poster's auto-approve status was suspended as a result of an article that is successfully appealed, auto-approve will be restored.
Complaints or compliments about moderator judgments, and other matters related to the running of the newsgroup are welcome on the administrative list, but not on the newsgroup. No post relating to such discussions will be approved for the newsgroup. Any decision made about action to take (or not to take) is final. Posters who persist in pressing the issue will be subject to auto-rejection.
Charter revisions: Any discussion on revision of the charter must include "CHARTER:" as the beginning of the subject line. After discussion in the newsgroup, the moderators will judge the group consensus and let the group know if any charter changes take place. Any changes must pass with a 2/3rds majority of the moderators agreeing on what the group is requesting. This is not a vote of the opinions of the moderators, but rather to ensure that the moderators have a clear understanding of what the members of the newsgroup want. If the moderators are not sure of the consensus of the group, or if members of the group challenge the moderators' decision, an actual vote will be taken. Votes will require a 2/3 majority to modify the charter. The moderators will post all results of charter modification votes to the group after the voting is completed. The subject line will include the phrase "CHARTER:" so that those who wish to ignore them can skip the threads or set their killfiles/filters to ignore them. Changes will also be made to the FAQ.
The FAQ will be posted every Friday.
Moderators who are unwilling or unable to uphold the charter in their personal posts or moderation activities may be removed by a two-thirds vote of the other moderators.
Third party cancels ('retro-moderation') by anyone, including but not limited to moderators, is strictly against newsgroup policy.
Disclaimer: - The moderators of this newsgroup are not responsible for truthfulness or legality of any of the posts. - The approval of a post by a moderator is NOT an endorsement by the moderator or moderation team. - Posters assume full responsibility for the content of their posts. - Readers using information that appears in the newsgroup do so at their own risk. - Posters agree that by posting items to this newsgroup they indemnify and hold harmless the moderation team and service providers.
MODERATOR INFO: rec.autos.sport.nascar.moderated
Moderator: "Eric O. Troldahl" <email@example.com> Moderator: Bob Paxton <firstname.lastname@example.org> Moderator: Deven Atkinson <email@example.com> Moderator: "Lisa A. Carbrey" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Moderator: John Martin <email@example.com> Moderator: Martin Moleski <firstname.lastname@example.org> Moderator: Chris Watkins <email@example.com>
Article submission address: firstname.lastname@example.org Administrative contact address: email@example.com
END MODERATOR INFO.
rec.autos.sport.nascar.moderated Final Voter list
Voted YES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ nascar3 [at] bestweb<dot>net Craig Witkowski da229 [at] freenet.carleton.ca Ken Hilson hruska [at] nortel.ca Bob Hruska janetm [at] unixg.ubc.ca Janet Morrison denis [at] csg.uwaterloo.ca Denis Rowland miked [at] 99main.com Mike Day rthlsbrj [at] pprd.abbott.com John Rothlisberger rpali [at] alienshore.com Rick Pali bwblevins [at] amoco.com Brian Blevins afret69 [at] aol.com Pat Champion biffan [at] aol.com L. A. Carr Cadman14X [at] AOL.com Tim Dike FAN3car [at] aol.com Glenn T. Allen Honaker1 [at] aol.com Joe Honaker injedolds [at] aol.com Injedolds JRs660fan [at] aol.com John Owren lkrz [at] aol.com Laura Kreuzer Omajahn [at] aol.com perkykimmy [at] aol.com Kimberly Douglas racerdave6 [at] aol.com David Blaskey rbemben [at] aol.com Richard E. Bemben sforsell [at] aol.com Scott Forsell SLMehl [at] aol.com Shari Mehlhose Tinadog [at] aol.com Jerry Kyte Trezzer [at] aol.com Terry Kiernan Winstongal [at] aol.com Sue kimdv [at] best.com Kim DeVaughn aclaffie [at] bgnn.com Alan J. Claffie stufflehead [at] bigfoot.com Kenneth W. Sodemann mark [at] breland.com Mark A. Breland kurtis [at] centilliondata.com Kurtis Miller KR10 [at] chrysler.com Kurt Rasmussen lgl [at] coact.com Louis Lauer charlie.andrews [at] commobunker.com Charles D. Andrews LStaley [at] compuserve.com Laura Staley agross [at] cray.com Alan Grossmeier cathyr [at] cybergal.com Cathy Ribbeck dougk [at] cyberia.com Douglas B. Klunk