[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: SRH Reorg FAQ
[alt.flame.jay-stevens and alt.jyothish snipped.
will be posted separately to srh]
In article <4sfgm5$jtl@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
Ajay Shah <ajay@mercury.aichem.arizona.edu> wrote:
>
>Namaskar,
>
>On Mon, 15 Jul 1996, GOPAL Ganapathiraju Sree Ramana wrote:
>
>>
>> what bothers me is that instead of deciding whether *majority* of
>> readers consider the proposal as useful to the group, through a
>> usenet vote, the proposal is being killed because the current
>> moderator does not consent it.
>
>
>Considering that the newsgroup *was indeed* created through a voting
>process with an overwhelming majority, less than 3 months before the re-org
>proposal, this is a rather weak argument.
there are two different things: (1) creation of srh and (2) improvement
of srh. no one said srh was not created through a vote. but the RFD
for improving the srh is being blocked from going to a vote. what way
taking a vote will hamper the srh cause? if majority people want the
changes, they will have them. and if majority dont want them, they
will not have them.
>The driving force behind the re-org proposal has never been that
>it does not enjoy the support of the majority, but the fact that I
>stood up for the word HINDU, during the creation of the Vaishnava newsgroup.
i dont understand this english: if you feel that the driving force
behind the proposal is that it enjoys majority, then it clear that
you are working against the wishes of the majority.
if on the other hand you feel that the reorg proposal does not
have support of majority of the readers, then you need not oppose
the CFV -- after all, you will be vindicated.
the very fact that you are blocking the CFV shows where your
confidence lies.
gopal
Follow-Ups:
