Xref: utzoo news.admin:7288 news.groups:13457
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!chuq
From: chuq@Apple.COM (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.groups
Subject: Re: These new voting schemes
Message-ID: <35805@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 21 Oct 89 02:07:15 GMT
References: <4771@ncar.ucar.edu>
Organization: Life is just a Fantasy novel played for keeps
Lines: 34

>  For these reasons, I am convinced that multiple-vote schemes are
>unworkable.

I agree with Greg on this...

> I can see two ways to do this: 1) Have a
>separate vote on the name first.

>Have a name czar or small group of czars choose which name to vote on.
>This obviously requires finding a group of people that the net admins will
>trust.

Greg forgets (3) which I suggested early on. A person who feels that the
name is incorrect sponsors their own separate voting on the preferred
consensus name. It is run in parallel, removing the delays on voting on the
name. The alternate name would be generated by consensus and not by a
net.czar, removing the mostly irrational fears about net.gods going crazy
and taking over all the free world. It doesn't add serious delays, lots of
complexity, is verifiable and doesn't focus excess power in the hands of a
few megalomaniacs like me. 

It also guarantees (mostly) that naming arguments won't be done spuriously,
since it requies someont to put up and run an election, which isn't likely
to happen for silly reasons.

chuq

-- 

Chuq Von Rospach <+> Editor,OtherRealms <+> Member SFWA/ASFA
chuq@apple.com <+> CI$: 73317,635 <+> [This is myself speaking]

Trust Mama Nature to remind us just how important things like sci.aquaria's
name really is in the scheme of things.