OK...I modified the poll with the suggested option. However, it appears to
have lost everybody's prior votes. Sorry...please vote again.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: wulrich@a... [mailto:wulrich@a...]
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 4:08 PM
To: BRHSlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [BRHSlist] Re: Commercial Postings on BRHSlist
--- In BRHSlist@y..., jonathanharris@e... wrote:
> Dave and List --
>
> Thanks for taking this poll. I'm all in favor of polls and of
majority
> rule, but a little more clarification and maybe some
discussion/debate
> might help us make a better decision. (I just voted but felt I did
so in
> brute ignorance.... Since it says we can change our votes right up
to the
> cut-off date, maybe it's not too late.)
>
> In the four months I've been a subscriber, I've felt able to get
plenty of
> commercial information off both the list and the BRHS web site,
through its
> Modelers Depot
>
> How would any of this change if more/fewer commercial postings were
> allowed? What would "commercial" postings look like? Can someone
point to
> an example?
>
> I also am a little concerned about how votes will be tallied in
this poll.
> A person who votes for "no postings," for instance, would probably
be
> happier (as a 2nd choice) with a policy allowing a select subset
("only
> approved by list moderator" or "only Burlington-related") than with
a
> policy of unrestricted postings. Yet if those three choices ("none,
> "moderator-approved only" and "Burlington only") each garnered 20%
of the
> vote while "unrestricted" received 25%, "unrestricted" presumably
would
> win. Maybe there should be a run-off between the top two vote-
getters to
> minimize the possibility of such distortions. That way, whatever
wins will
> have at least 50% approval.
>
> If we do allow (more) commercial postings, I would only ask that we
observe
> the basic rules of common courtesy and common sense: that our
moderator
> (whom I completely trust) be open and even-handed; that there be
some
> filter to prevent an individual or company from saturation bombing
or
> posting the same information over and over; that we demand rigorous
> standards of business ethics for those who offer goods or services
through
> these posts; and that we always remain open to tweaking or revising
> whatever policy we adopt if a significant number among us feel it
is not
> working.
>
> Jonathan
> -------------
excellent points jonathan. if there was at catagory of "limited
advertising - burlington lines only and moderator approved" i would
change my vote in a heartbeat.
warren
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|