Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!comp.vuw.ac.nz!andrew
From: andrew@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Andrew Vignaux)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: A new 100 NO votes suggestion
Message-ID: <1989Nov12.105848.5876@comp.vuw.ac.nz>
Date: 12 Nov 89 10:58:48 GMT
References: <11424@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <6872@ficc.uu.net>
Sender: andrew@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Andrew Vignaux)
Reply-To: andrew@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Andrew Vignaux)
Organization: Comp Sci, Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand.
Lines: 51

In article <11424@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>, David Joseph Grabiner
describes a system where the vote happens as per the current
guidelines.  If the vote passes (by YES-NO>100) and there were less
than 100 NO votes the group is created.  If there were more than 100
NO votes, a second naming ballot is held to choose the name from the
list of suggested names drawn up in the inevitable discussion.

If you combine this with the Karl Lehenbauer's proposal <6872@ficc.uu.net>
for two classes of "NO" votes ("NO group" and "BAD name") in the first
vote you have:

	(YES - NO) > 100 and (BAD < 100)	create the group
	(YES - NO) > 100 and (BAD > 100)	have a name ballot
	(YES - NO) < 100			not enough interest

[ BAD == 100 is left "undefined".  The NET will "bus error: core dump"
  or turn into a butterfly.  This is meant to appeal to the "anarchic"
  elements :-]

People should be able to vote for both YES/NO and BAD.

The naming ballot can be made as complicated (simple approval, MAUVE,
STV) as the NET likes.  Perhaps name votes could be run by a "group
name" Czar?

[ Has this proposal come up before? ]


I like this system, *especially* the delay in group creation caused by
the group proponent choosing a controversial name.

If someone wants to create a group for a relatively non-controversial
subject ASAP then it is in their best interest to pick a name that
will succeed on the first ballot.

The mythical "NO veto" voting block can only delay the creation of the
group for a month.  "eniac" would still have passed with this (and any
other?) method.

Essentially, the vote only gets "complicated" if the group proponent
"ignores" NET suggestions during the discussion period as to
non-controversial names.  It is certainly a good incentive to get the
name "right" for the first vote.  With any luck we may never see a
naming ballot and we may never have to work out the gory details :-)


More discussion not necessarily desired but welcome :-)

Andrew
-- 
Domain address: andrew@comp.vuw.ac.nz   Path address: ...!uunet!vuwcomp!andrew