Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!enea.se!sommar
From: sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Yet another proposal.
Message-ID: <8910081924.AA15716@helios.enea.se>
Date: 8 Oct 89 19:24:31 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Lines: 24

Peter Da Silva wrote:
>Geoff Allen (geoff@pmafire.UUCP) writes:
>> 	Group sci.skinny.dipping is voted on.  The result is 500 yes and
>> 	150 no.  A second vote is held on rec.swimming.nude (a name
>> 	chosen by the czar).  The result this time (thanks to the
>> 	publicity from the controversy) is 675 yes and 101 no.  People
>> 	obviously want the group, and poeple like rec.swimming.nude
>> 	better than sci.skinny.dipping.  Do we create the group or not?
>
>I don't want to say this can't happen, but I think it unlikely. In any
>case, 101 NO votes is still a lot. I suspect that the group name was
>still controversial.

I think you miss one point, Peter. Why was the second name 
controversial? Maybe a lot of original YES voters got pissed
on that the name they wanted was refused and therefore voted
NO in the second vote? Actually if you really want the name
sci.skinny.dipping - and the net seem to host that sort of people -
your obvious tactics is to vote NO the second time.
  This said, you folks maybe realize that Geoff's example isn't
that hypophetical.
-- 
Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se
"My baby's a 26. On a scale from one to ten, my baby's a 26." - Chic