Nan:2010-10-02-lcc-rec.arts.sf.reviews: Difference between revisions

From Usenet Big-8 Management Board
m (Created page with "<pre> From: Big-8 Management Board <board@big-8.org> Subject: RFD: rec.arts.sf.reviews moderated (remove) LAST CALL FOR COMMENTS Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 08:27:27 EDT Message-ID: <i...")
 
mNo edit summary
 
Line 5: Line 5:
Message-ID: <i86ugo$9c5$1@news.albasani.net>
Message-ID: <i86ugo$9c5$1@news.albasani.net>


               MODERATOR VACANCY INVESTIGATION (MVI)
               REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
               moderated group rec.arts.sf.reviews
               moderated group rec.arts.sf.reviews


This is a formal Moderator Vacancy Investigation (MVI), begun because
This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to remove moderated
moderated newsgroup rec.arts.sf.reviews is not functioning,
newsgroup rec.arts.sf.reviews.
and may have been abandoned by its moderator(s).
 
This investigation will attempt to verify the reasons for non-function,
and may result in the removal of the group or the selection and instal-
lation of a new moderator.  In practice, the Big-8 Management Board
considers the third alternative--changing the status of the group from
moderated to unmoderated--as likely to cause more harm than good.


RATIONALE:
RATIONALE:
Line 32: Line 25:
   <sf-reviews@postmodern.com>... User unknown
   <sf-reviews@postmodern.com>... User unknown


Aahz Maruch forwarded the MVI to Alan Wexelblat, the moderator of
record, and got no response.
> >Message-ID: <i3p7pg$m5p$1@panix5.panix.com>
Stephen Graham said he would be willing to serve as moderator, but is
concerned that the long period without posts will make it difficult
to get started again. He posted a query to related groups and received
negative response.
> >Message-ID: <DMWdnT_ULIxbt_3RnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d@speakeasy.net>
> >Message-ID: <Asedne3CkrmY--jRnZ2dnUVZ_uudnZ2d@speakeasy.net>
NEWSGROUPS LINE:
NEWSGROUPS LINE:


Line 87: Line 89:
PROCEDURE:
PROCEDURE:


Those who wish to comment on this moderator vacancy investigation should
Those who wish to comment on this request to remove this newsgroup should
subscribe to news.groups.proposals and participate in the relevant
subscribe to news.groups.proposals and participate in the relevant threads
threads in that newsgroup.
in that newsgroup.


To this end, the followup header of this MVI has been set to  
To this end, the followup header of this RFD has been set to
news.groups.proposals.
news.groups.proposals.


For more information on the MVI process, please see  
In the course of the removal process four formal announcements are posted
(MVI, 1st RFD, 2nd RFD, and LCC), each taking two weeks. At the end of the
process the B8MB will vote on the issue.
 
Available options for rec.arts.sf.reviews are:
- leave the group as it is
- remove the group
 
For more information on the removal process, please see  


http://www.big-8.org/wiki/Moderator_Vacancy_Investigations
http://www.big-8.org/wiki/Group_Removal_FAQ


CHANGE HISTORY:
CHANGE HISTORY:
Line 102: Line 112:
2010-05-20 First probe post
2010-05-20 First probe post
2010-08-09 Moderator Vacancy Investigation
2010-08-09 Moderator Vacancy Investigation
2010-08-23 1st RFD
2010-09-06 2nd RFD
2010-10-02 LCC
</pre>
</pre>

Latest revision as of 22:58, 2 October 2010

From: Big-8 Management Board <board@big-8.org>
Subject: RFD: rec.arts.sf.reviews moderated (remove) LAST CALL FOR COMMENTS
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 08:27:27 EDT
Message-ID: <i86ugo$9c5$1@news.albasani.net>

              REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
              moderated group rec.arts.sf.reviews

This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to remove moderated
newsgroup rec.arts.sf.reviews.

RATIONALE:

According to Google's archive the last regular post was approved on
2004-12-07. The last regular crosspost (approved by the moderators of
rec.arts.movies.reviews) was published 2005-04-26.

A probe message resulted in a bounce.

sf-reviews@postmodern.com
  (generated from rec-arts-sf-reviews@moderators.isc.org)
  SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT TO:<sf-reviews@postmodern.com>:
  host penguin.postmodern.com [75.101.18.162]: 550 5.1.1
  <sf-reviews@postmodern.com>... User unknown

Aahz Maruch forwarded the MVI to Alan Wexelblat, the moderator of
record, and got no response.
> >Message-ID: <i3p7pg$m5p$1@panix5.panix.com>
Stephen Graham said he would be willing to serve as moderator, but is
concerned that the long period without posts will make it difficult
to get started again. He posted a query to related groups and received 
negative response.
> >Message-ID: <DMWdnT_ULIxbt_3RnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d@speakeasy.net>
> >Message-ID: <Asedne3CkrmY--jRnZ2dnUVZ_uudnZ2d@speakeasy.net>
NEWSGROUPS LINE:

rec.arts.sf.reviews	Reviews of science fiction/fantasy/horror works. (Moderated)

DISTRIBUTION:

news.announce.newgroups
news.groups.proposals
rec.arts.sf.reviews
rec.arts.sf.misc

CHARTER OF REC.ARTS.SF.REVIEWS

  rec.arts.sf-reviews will be a moderated newsgroup, under shared
  moderation, whose purpose is to distribute reviews and critical 
  reviews of works of interest to the science fiction/fantasy/horror 
  community.  

  "Works" includes but is not limited to:  books, short stories, 
  movies, "graphic novels," and any other publically-available media.

  "Of interest to the sf/f/h community" will be interpreted
  liberally by the sitting moderator.  The discussion period for
  the creation of this group has led to the conclusion that nonfiction 
  or other kinds of fiction by and/or about sf/f/h writers would be 
  permitted, as well as non-fiction of a sort related to one of the 
  above (e.g., speculative science books or mythographies).  

  Reviews of individual episodes or issues of continuing TV series, 
  comic books, etc., would most likely _not_ be permitted; however, 
  reviews of such series as a whole, or of large "arcs" of such
  series, would most likely be permitted.  As noted, however, this 
  would be up to the judgement of the sitting moderator, as influenced
  by the readership.

  Multiple reviews of the same work(s) will be welcome, as will
  single reviews of multiple works.  Comments on reviews will be 
  passed to the newsgroup on a _highly_ selective basis:  generally, 
  they must say something new about the work, rather than simply 
  discussing the review.  This is not intended to stifle debate 
  but to keep the content/noise ratio as high as possible.

HISTORY OF THE GROUP:

rec.arts.sf-reviews is a moderated newsgroup which passed its vote for
creation by 342:25 as reported in news.announce.newgroups on 8 May 1991.
rec.arts.sf.reviews supersedes it as per the 714:86 vote in the
rec.arts.sf reorganization results announced on 13 October 1991.

PROPONENT:

Alexander Bartolich <alexander.bartolich@gmx.at>

PROCEDURE:

Those who wish to comment on this request to remove this newsgroup should
subscribe to news.groups.proposals and participate in the relevant threads
in that newsgroup.

To this end, the followup header of this RFD has been set to
news.groups.proposals.

In the course of the removal process four formal announcements are posted
(MVI, 1st RFD, 2nd RFD, and LCC), each taking two weeks. At the end of the
process the B8MB will vote on the issue.

Available options for rec.arts.sf.reviews are:
- leave the group as it is
- remove the group

For more information on the removal process, please see 

http://www.big-8.org/wiki/Group_Removal_FAQ

CHANGE HISTORY:

2010-05-20	First probe post
2010-08-09	Moderator Vacancy Investigation
2010-08-23	1st RFD
2010-09-06	2nd RFD
2010-10-02	LCC