Thoughts on Usenet Governance

[Terminator]

[Default] On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 20:41:48 -0800, Bob Officer

I think the best thing would be for all members of the current
*tainted* board resign. Russ would appoint an Temporary board to
achieve his original project and find candidates to administer the
BEight Hierarchy. And then Russ should resign...

I have some questions
How do you think Russ should find people to be on this temporary
Board?

There is no need for herr fuehrer Russ Allbery
to hand pick yet another clique of totalitarian sadists
with megalomaniacal tendencies.

He simply needs to release the PGP key to general public.
Because HE holds the entire big-8, the biggest, globally
distributed information system, hostage.

HE is responsible for all this raging nazi sickness.

All these puppets of his are just that, puppets.

This is HIM, who is standing behind this grand nazi scam
of controlling big-8. He was never elected using the
democratic principles and the very idea of controlling
the GLOBAL information system of OPEN PUBLIC forums
by ANY party is simply sick.

No one can possibly control such a system.
About the only rules that apply is the International
Convention on Basic Human Rights, recognizing:

1. Freedom of speech.
2. Freedom of association.
3. Freedom of chosing ones own beliefs and religious convictions.

Anything else beyond it could not be recognized
even in principle.

Usenet can not be ruled by ANY clique of totalitarian dicators
as that would mean nothing else than the end of Democracy itself.

Simple as that.

Enough.

What criteria do you think Russ should use to find people for the
temporary board?
What criteria should the temporary Board use in choosing candidates
for the permanent Board?
What attributes should those selected to be on the temporary Board
have as compared to those selected for the permanent Board?
How would you suggest a candidate gets selected for a permanent place
ion the Bioard?
Isnt it more likely that the temporary Board would actually become the
permanent Board?
Do you really think Russ would even be interested in doing such a
thing?
Why would Russ resign? What would be the incentive for him to do so?
Is it me or am I having a bad case of deja vu?

[Terminator]

Not true. this is an indirect influence because One must communicate
inside a censored group. Your communications must pass a biased
censor.

They must pass through the moderators.

You are just a power freak.
That simply indicates you do not respect yourself.
That is why there is a craving for "power"
over just about all there is.

Simple as that.

The same is true of all RFDs and CFVs issued since n.a.n was
created back in the 1980s--they had to be approved by the
n.a.n moderator(s).
If you want to register an opinion in a poll, your opinions
pass through the hands of a polltaker.
Marty

[Terminator]

If you want to register an opinion in a poll, your opinions
pass through the hands of a polltaker.

There is no need for any polls.
There can be as many groups as you can imagine.
With the computation power of today,
this isn't even an issue to be considered.

You are simply feeding on this decay
as it gives you a sense of self-significance.

But you are empty.
Hollow.

Because you are PROGRAMMED this way.

No one is responsible.
But YOU.

Enough.

The value of any poll is tied directly to the confidence consumers have in
the validity/reliability of the results. The reputation of the pollster
cannot be separated from this factor.
Russ was fond of saying that the old voting system ended discussion on a
topic because the vote was the final word. The old vote-takers were
respected. I have yet to see any respect shown to the current crop of
pollsters. (I have yet to see any reason to respect the recent pollsters.)

[Terminator]

If you want to register an opinion in a poll, your opinions
pass through the hands of a polltaker.

The value of any poll is tied directly to the confidence consumers have in
the validity/reliability of the results. The reputation of the pollster
cannot be separated from this factor.

In the main system we're using now

There is no system.
I am an expert in systems.

There is no system here.
It is all but global madness,
created by the people who do not believe
in their own validity.

Enough.

(using newsgroups to make a decision
about newsgroups), everyone gets to check the results as much as they
want. It's transparent and (I think) about as direct as you can get.
People can see the data, evaluate it, and make their own decisions
about how good it is.
Marty

[Terminator]

If you want to register an opinion in a poll, your opinions
pass through the hands of a polltaker.

The value of any poll is tied directly to the confidence consumers have in
the validity/reliability of the results. The reputation of the pollster
cannot be separated from this factor.
Russ was fond of saying

Russ is a conman and a thief.

He has been supressing himself his entire life.
That is why there is a craving to control and dominate.
It is just a compensation for his own inferiority complex.
And he is a gutless slime,
who does not even have courage
to come and see the fruits of his long labor,
of something he was craving for his entire life
more or less.

And now he is shitting in his pants
because he does realize
it was all waste.

But he does not know where to go next.

And all these puppets
are not even humans.
They are nothing more
than biorobots,
programmed to oblivion,
with the most primitive ideas
of domination
because of their own complex of inferiority.

Biorobots.

Simple as that.

that the old voting system ended discussion on a
topic because the vote was the final word. The old vote-takers were
respected. I have yet to see any respect shown to the current crop of
pollsters. (I have yet to see any reason to respect the recent
pollsters.)

In the main system we're using now (using newsgroups to make a decision
about newsgroups), everyone gets to check the results as much as they
want. It's transparent and (I think) about as direct as you can get.
People can see the data, evaluate it, and make their own decisions
about how good it is.

In a previous exchange in which I described the proper method of qualitative
analysis, I detailed it's shortcomings. What "you think" has nothing to do
with sound practice. The fact that there are now 2 newsgroups in which
proposals are discussed nullifies any validity your shoddy methodology might
once have had.

[Terminator]

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 08:09:35 -0400, in news.groups, "Martin X.

Not true. this is an indirect influence because One must communicate
inside a censored group. Your communications must pass a biased
censor.

They must pass through the moderators.
The same is true of all RFDs and CFVs issued since n.a.n was
created back in the 1980s--they had to be approved by the
n.a.n moderator(s).
If you want to register an opinion in a poll, your opinions
pass through the hands of a polltaker.
Marty

Nice snip and waffle martin, Standard output from Fr. Weasel lately.
Have you ever been honest with even yourself?

Very good question.

[Terminator]

Not true. this is an indirect influence because One must communicate
inside a censored group. Your communications must pass a biased
censor.

They must pass through the moderators.
The same is true of all RFDs and CFVs issued since n.a.n was
created back in the 1980s--they had to be approved by the
n.a.n moderator(s).

So you're equating the work of people main job was scanning the *format*
of an article to see that it fit into the guidelines of submitting an
RFD with those who moderate on *content*?

You have been picking someone's ass
all your life.

And what have you found?

Well,
SHIT.

A lot of it.
And then?

[Terminator]

I think one other proponent may have been the guy who wanted the bass
fishing tournament group. He started out proposing
rec.outdoors.bassfishing.tournaments (rec.outdoors.fishing.bass
already exists and has some discussion about bass tournaments). When
it was suggested that he make the name
rec.outdoors.fishing.bass.tournaments, or simply consider using the
existing group; he changed the proposal to include all types of
fishing tournaments (even though from his first proposal it appears he
was only interested in bass tournaments). He gave up in frustration
after about a week.

Yes, he went away unhappy.
I believe his frustration came from the garden variety debate
about the proper way to name a newsgroup rather than because
of any changes in rules made by the board during the discussion
period.

You are just a stupid control freak.

Because you are empty.
Hollow.

Simple as that.

Marty

[Terminator]

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 03:40:57 GMT, "David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)"

You may directly influence the big-8 by
participating in RFD discussions.
You may directly influence the big-8 by
participating in the straw polls.

Both of these are not direct, there indirect.

The CFV was an advisory polling mechanism.

All garbage.
All scam.

Created by crooks.

Just like yourself.

Simple as that.

We are using a different advisory polling mechanism.
You may tell the board what you think about an
RFD. The board will take your advice into account.
Marty

[Terminator]

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 08:18:11 -0400, in news.groups, "Martin X.

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 03:40:57 GMT, "David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)"

You may directly influence the big-8 by
participating in RFD discussions.
You may directly influence the big-8 by
participating in the straw polls.

Both of these are not direct, there indirect.

The CFV was an advisory polling mechanism.
We are using a different advisory polling mechanism.
You may tell the board what you think about an
RFD.

The board then ignores all opinions which it disagrees.

There is no "board",
you old fool.

and creates the group anyway. the board has created many groups
against the advice of many users. these groups are now empty groups.

[Terminator]

Russ would appoint an Temporary board to
achieve his original project and find candidates to administer the
BEight Hierarchy. And then Russ should resign...

That's what we went through in 2005-2006.
If you read what Russ wrote,

Who is Russ,
you lil idiot?

A Jesus Crist?
A REFERENCE on just about ANYTHING?

What have you done to your own brain?

you will see that
he gave the board a passing grade and (with Todd
and Brian Edmonds) passed the inheritance on to
us.
Marty

[Terminator]

Russ would appoint an Temporary board to
achieve his original project and find candidates to administer the
BEight Hierarchy. And then Russ should resign...

That's what we went through in 2005-2006.
If you read what Russ wrote, you will see that
he gave the board a passing grade and (with Todd
and Brian Edmonds) passed the inheritance on to
us.

What right does he have to "pass the inheritance"
to the biggest global information system there is?

On what basis this individual is allowed to hold
the entire big-8 hostage?

According to what international laws and principles
ANY group can control the global OPEN PUBLIC forums?

Marty

Farty, you are just a power hungry sicko,
holding on to this imaginary "powers" with your teeth.

For what?

You have no people's mandates which is a requirement
in ANY democratic system.

Your "committee" is a direct implementation of a
Stalinist totalitarian model of utter intolerance,
complete deceit, and raging dictatorship and ultimate
perversions.

And yet you hold on to this imaginary power.

That simply means you are sick with this totalitarian
desease, and sick people can not possibly control the
very fundamental concepts of Democracy.

Simple as that.

--
Member of the Big-8 Management Board (B8MB) -- http://www.big-8.org

ÞUnless otherwise indicated, I speak for myself, not for the Board.

[Terminator]

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:47:57 GMT, "David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)"

I know you consider it to be running on a trustee model. But I think
thats a totally inapproprate model. Trustee models are approprate in
sitations where the parties involved can't make desisions on there own
behalf.

Identifying "the parties involved" is the great problem of using
any kind of voting system to make decisions.

Quit peddling horseshit to...

To yourself. Because there isn't a single individual around
that can't comprehend that you are nothing but a power hungry
sicko with megalomaniacal tendencies.

There can't even be a discussion on "trustees",
"parliamentary" models or anything related to representation.
And you know it all too well.

You have no right to represent ANYONE on usenet but yourself.
You and your puppet theatre have never been given such
powers or authority.

You are just a sick man, obscessed with domination.
A blood boiling idiot, intolerant of the very idea of freedom.

That is why you are holding on to these imaginary "powers",
thinking that there is a chance that some clueless or newbies
will accept you as something real. But you are talking to
wrong people. They just know too much about this whole grand
scam. There isn't a single chance they are going to swallow
your power trips as something even remotely resembling reality.

That is why people like you are called clueless.
As you are peddling the wrong shit
to the wrong people
and there isn't a chance in hell
you are going to succeed peddling it.

Simple as that.

Enough.

If you have methods for counting and identifying the population
of newsgroups so that we might have some confidence that "the
parties involved" and only "the parties involved" have been
surveyed, then you may present the data you collect as very
persuasive evidence for one side of an RFD or the other.
If you are merely imagining such a system for the sake of
argument, it is not of much use to us. Imaginary systems
are always better than any approximation of them in practice.

However in Usenet anyone who is interested can be invovled, therefor a
more perspantry model should be used. A trustee model treats everone
on usenet as if there eather children or insane. And while this group
does sometimes look like its full of both, it is filled with resonable
adults who are effectively being patinized by that model.

I don't buy the idea that a participatory model can or should
be implemented in making decisions about the big-8 list.
Those who wish to give input on RFDs may do so. In my book,
that is "participation." And of that input, those who say
"I will use the new group" are the most important group to
listen to (on the assumption that the naming conventions
have been met). I am biased in favor of creating new
groups as a general rule.
Marty

[Terminator]

Trustee models are approprate in
sitations where the parties involved can't make desisions on there own
behalf.

Which is *exactly* the situation in the Big 8. Individuals who
participate in Big 8 groups can make decisions, but we have no way to
determine whether most Big 8 users want a particular new group. Most Big
8 users couldn't care less how such decisions are made. That's
unfortunate,

Why is it unfortunate?

but that's the situation. Even given a working voting
system,

There is no need for ANY of this "voting system" crap.
The groups ought to be created by automatically accepting
the newgroup controls, just as NNTP protocol was designed.

ALL of you, power hungry nazis, are simply a bunch of
deranged, power hungry sickos, trying to control the
GLOBAL information system.

Yes, DERANGED.

Enough.

the best we could do is determine whether a subset of Big 8
users wants a new group. But we don't have a working voting system, and
that subset's opinion has a poor track record at predicting the success
of new groups.

However in Usenet anyone who is interested can be invovled, therefor a
more [participatory] model should be used.

Any Big 8 "citizen" can freely communicate with the board. The record
shows that public input *does* matter. Would a pretend vote be *more*
participatory than that? Does it make sense for the vote of some schmoe
who's never even read an article in a Big 8 group to count as much as
that of someone who's been an active groupie for 5, 10, or 20 years?

A trustee model treats everone
on usenet as if there eather children or insane.

No, like you said, it just treats them like they're unable to make a
decision.

And while this group
does sometimes look like its full of both, it is filled with resonable
adults who are effectively being patinized by that model.

I don't think anyone who's honestly engaged the board has been patronized.