Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!spdcc!xylogics!cloud9!jjmhome!cpoint!alien
From: alien@cpoint.UUCP (Alien Wells)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: A proposal for a new voting scheme
Keywords: Vote, Alien, STV, MAUVE, 100 NOs
Message-ID: <2817@cpoint.UUCP>
Date: 9 Nov 89 20:46:51 GMT
References: <21699@gryphon.COM> <2784@cpoint.UUCP> <2785@cpoint.UUCP> <44481@looking.on.ca> <4470@solo10.cs.vu.nl>
Reply-To: alien@cpoint.UUCP (Alien Wells)
Organization: Clearpoint Research Corp., Hopkinton Mass.
Lines: 22

In article <4470@solo10.cs.vu.nl> maart@cs.vu.nl (Maarten Litmaath) writes:
>I like the proposal, but there's another point to consider: what if there's
>a close finish of 2 (or more) groups?
>Example:
>			YES	NO
>	sci.aquaria	666	500
>	news.aquaria	665	500
>
>Shouldn't both groups be created?

You should only create two different groups if they are to have different
charters.  If they are in the same vote, they are probably a disagreement
about the namespace to put a single group in.

If it is really two charters for different groups, it should be handled
in different votes.  In this case, if sci.aquaria was created and enough
people STILL wanted an additional news.aquaria, they could have a second
vote over the new charter.
-- 
--------|	Fall not in love, therefore.  It will stick to your face.
Alien   |   					- Deteriorata
--------|     decvax!frog!cpoint!alien      bu-cs!mirror!frog!cpoint!alien