[EM] What is the List Conduct Petition?

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 03/26/01
>Ossipoff - The Flamer,
>
>      Before I vote in your fancy election, I would like to know what is 
>the
>List Conduct Petition?

A petition to the list owner asking for certain rules about list
conduct. If that polling topic were chosen, and a certain set of
rules were chosen in the list-conduct-petition poll, then there would
be a petition to the list-owner to enact those rules.

>      I know the different options of months and ice cream and pizza
>toppings

No, you don't know exactly which ice cream flavors would be voted on,
because none were specified. For nearly all of the polling topics,
the nominations of those topics didn't specify a pre-written list of
options to vote between. The choice of options for a particular
polling issue is something that can best be made after that polling
topic is chosen.

First we find out which polling topic wins. Then we take nominations
for options for that topic, and then we between those options.
Yes, the Pizza Toppings nomination specified pizza topping options.
That's good, because it means that if that polling topic won,
nominations wouldn't be necessary. But in general, having to pre-specify
the options when making a nomination would make nomination too difficult.
It's perfectly ok, and usually easier, to nominate the options after
a certain polling topic wins and becomes the topic of the subsequent
poll.

, but what would be the options of this List Conduct Petition of
>yours.

As I said, nominations would be taken after such time as List Conduct
Petition won the poll-topic poll. But this may be a moot questions,
since List Conduct Petition doesn't appear to be winning, or to even
be a close runner-up, and the voting period is almost over.

>      How would it work?

That would depend on what the nominations were, and which of those
options on the poll.


>      I mean, suppose someone were to call you an `Ass'?  Heaven forbid!
>      How would you use your List Conduct Petition to punish this person 
>and
>make him rue the day he was born?

Hopefully the rule would take the context into account. For instance,
if you called me an "ass" after I'd been repeatedly sending in whole
postings, not about voting systems, but about you, I doubt that
you'd be afoul of the rules. But, again, you're asking prematurely,
since nominations would be taken only after such time as
List Conduct Petition should win the poll-topic poll.

>
>      Another question, will this List Conduct Petition apply to you also,

It must be obvious that any rule would apply equally to anyone who
consistently and flagrantly uses the list for writing about list-members
instead of voting systems. But, again, that wording might be part
of something that I'd nominate, but obviously there's no wording yet.



>or is it to be only for you to use as an instrument to cleanse the Election
>Methods list of unbelievers?

I must admit that I don't know what belief has to do with this.
It's really more about conduct.

But if you're asking if the proposed
rules would include a provision to expell someone from the list--what
do you think? What meaning would conduct-rules have if there were
no provision for expulsion?


>      So many question - so few answers.

Don, if you vote List Conduct Petition in 1st place, then you might
get your answers.


>
>      I may vote for it myself if it also could be used to punish you when
>you flame one of us, but that is not likely.

I assure you that all of my nominations for that poll topic, and
surely anyone elses too, would apply uniformly to every list-member.

My nominations would be about more than using a descriptive name
like "IRVie". As for "ass" or "twit", I agree that those should
be forbidden unless there's flagrant provocation.

But you could nominate a proposal that no perjoratives of any kind
can be used, including "IRVie", even in passing as part of another
discussion. That would seem to me to be going a little too far, but
the vote would settle that matter, and you could nominate whatever
rules you like. I would vote for a rule that would forbid me to call
you an "ass" or a "twit" without flagrant provocation.

It's perhaps a good thing that list conduct rules are being discussed
now, because it clarifies what form some of the nominations would take.

>You have always been able to
>escape accountability.

So have you, mostly. That's why rules would help.

Mike Ossipoff


>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com