Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!texbell!sugar!ficc!jeffd
From: jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Give it up, folks
Summary: Art imitating life
Message-ID: <6957@ficc.uu.net>
Date: 14 Nov 89 14:45:55 GMT
References: <127839@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Organization: Ferranti International Controls
Lines: 40

In article <127839@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>, williamt@athena1.Sun.COM (William A. Turnbow) writes:

> 	Having a committee as the first result has the positive benefit of
> not allowing a vocal group kill off chances for a new group that would
> serve a useful purpose.  As an example, suppose there were 500 democrats
> on line, and 550 republicans.  Both groups could keep the other from
> having a group, even though such a group would serve a useful
> audience.  Of course the more unfair case would be if there were only 300
> republicans.  The democrats could totally dominate the voting, unfairly
> eliminating the republicans chances for a group -- again, even though
> a group with 300+ contributors might very well be valid.
> 

Another example of art imitating life: about 1979, I believe, the
Georgia Legisature (heavily Democratic ) passed a law regulating 
which political parties would be allowed on the ballot.  The 
requirements were so Draconian, the Republicans would not 
have qualified!

Of course, in most States, requirements for "third" parties and/or
Independents getting on the ballot are so outrageous as to keep
most of them off.  It's startling to see elections in Poland
and Hungary with more parties allowed to participate than
in some States of our own Union.

But back to group creation: if we can hold a vote on the
hierarchy or name at the same time as we vote on whether to
create the group, there's no reason to retard group creation.


Jeff Daiell

Legalize tax evasion.



-- 
           "'Tis not too late to seek a newer world."

                           -- Alfred, Lord Tennyson