Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!xenitec!edhew
From: edhew@xenitec.on.ca (Ed Hew)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: 2/3 majority req'd (was: Re: Call For Discussion: Changing the Voting Guidelines)
Summary: a simple solution?
Keywords: simple, 2/3 majority
Message-ID: <1989Nov13.034158.8704@xenitec.on.ca>
Date: 13 Nov 89 03:41:58 GMT
References: <8566@medusa.cs.purdue.edu>
Reply-To: edhew@xenitec.UUCP (Ed Hew)
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: XeniTec Consulting Services, Kitchener, ON
Lines: 29

In article <8566@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> bee@cs.purdue.edu (Zaphod Beeblebrox) writes:
>Now that the blech.aquaria vote is over, I propose that the guidelines
>be modified to read as follows:
>
>"A vote shall be considered to have passed if:
>
>1) there are 100 more YES votes than NO votes; and
>
>2) there are at least twice as many YES votes than NO votes."

Yes on both counts.  It is currently much to simple to clobber common
sense on newgroup creation than it was ever intended to be.  The 'NET
requires a simple counterbalance to it's growth, and the 2/3 majority
may be the most easily implimentable of the many proposals we've seen.

>This will help keep highly controversial and divisive votes from
>passing.  This subject is hereby open to comments, flames, torching,
>burning-at-the-stake, incinerating, ...

The 2/3 majority counter-balance would certainly restrict the creation
of "fad" groups, and while it would make newgroup creation in general
more difficult, would that really be such a _bad_thing_ ?

>bee@cs.purdue.edu |     Fish heads, fish heads, eat them up, yum!"

  Ed. A. Hew       Authorized Technical Trainer        Xeni/Con Corporation
  work:  edhew@xenicon.uucp	 -or-	 ..!{uunet!}utai!lsuc!xenicon!edhew
->home:	 edhew@xenitec.on.ca	 -or-	   ..!{uunet!}watmath!xenitec!edhew
  # This posting has absolutely nothing to do with what I do for a living.