Call For Votes for sci.physics.strings

[Urs]

A new usenet newsgroup "sci.physics.strings" has been proposed recently.

The group shall offer researchers, graduate students and everybody else who is interested in string theory the opportunity to find and participate in discussions focused on topics of string theory, the candidate for a theory of quantum gravity and unification of forces.

Creating a new newsgroup on usenet requires a public poll. Everybody may and is invited to vote for or against the creation of sci.physics.strings. The instructions for how to vote together with further background information are given at

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1077593588.15146@isc.org .

Sci.physics.strings will be created if the poll yields 100 more YES than NO votes and at least twice as many YES as NO votes.

 

[arivero]

I was going to abstain, but the recent activity at the cafe and here in Thieman thread are moving me towards an affirmative vote :-) because perhaps after all it is possible to do really some physics online in the internet. Even if it is strings

 

[Urs]

Yes, doing research and cooperating on the internet is possible. But it is hard to get started. The recent events have shown that such a discussion profits from the presence and activity of several different forums with different cultures of discussion.

Three such forums, sci.physics.research, the Strings&Loops section of PF as well as the String Coffee Table, have participated intensively and mutually fertilized in the recent discussion of the 'LQG-string'.

A usenet newsgroup sci.physics.strings, with hopefully many experts participating that currently totally abstain from online discussion, would be an ideal addition.

But it will be hard. We are being told be usenet 'officials' that our chances for sci.physics.strings are not too good. We need at least 100+ YES votes. That's quite a bit. Most proposed newsgroups get barely more that 70-80 YES votes.

Therefore everybody who cares even a little bit should vote. Please don't abstain. Every vote is valuable.

Nobody should fear that sci.physics.strings will draw attention away from his favorite forum. I am not afraid for the Coffee Table, either. On the contrary, I am expecting new dynamics at the Coffee table and here on PF from the creation of sci.physics.strings, because the latter has the potential to bring in valuable people which currently don't participate in online discussion at all.

P.S. Regarding cooperation:

I am currently doing a step-by-step discussion of a paper of mine and papers by Ioannis Giannakis at http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/string/archives/000266.html#c000682 This is a great experience. Anyone who feels that he wants to chime in is invited to do so!

Another great example is what is happening at http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/string/archives/000298.html . Eric Forgy, Alejandro Rivero and now Prof. Bossavit are discussing new research in discrete geometry with applications to physics. Great fun.

 

[lethe]

you've got my vote

 

[rick1138]

Just sent in my ballot.

 

[Urs]

Thanks for your votes!

If you know anyone else who might be interested in online discussion of string theory then please let him or her know about the ballot, too.

 

[eforgy]

Moderators

I still can't seem to bring myself to support this group with Lubos listed as a moderator. His insulting behaviour is intolerable and this would just give him free reign to blast people with impunity.

I need to decide if I will simply not vote or give a NO vote.

Eric

PS: I think people should be aware of this before simply voting YES because having a string newsgroup sounds like a good idea. There is more politics going on here than they would like you to believe.

PPS: s.p.r. is not as unfriendly to strings as the call for votes would have you to believe either.

 

[rick1138]

The voting procedure is byzantine. How can these two statements be logically reconciled?

Voters must mail their ballots directly to the votetaker.

Votes mailed to any other email address, including that of the votetaker,
will NOT be counted.

 

[arivero]

Probably the votetaker is in Miami :-)

 

[lethe]

sci.physics.strings passes, 132:19!

 

[selfAdjoint]

Yay! When will it be up?

 

[lethe]

Originally posted by selfAdjoint
Yay! When will it be up?

apparently there will be a 5 day discussion period first.

 

[Mike2]

What recourse will one have if he feels that the moderator is censoring you?