Path: utzoo!yunexus!ists!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!samsung!usc!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!mcsun!ukc!stc!stl!dww From: dww@stl.stc.co.uk (David Wright) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: Suspicious Results of sci.aquaria vote Message-ID: <2421@stl.stc.co.uk> Date: 18 Nov 89 12:25:33 GMT Article-I.D.: stl.2421 References: <21910@gryphon.COM> <4323@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM> <18175.25612d86@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> <4199@nigel.udel.EDU> Sender: news@stl.stc.co.uk Reply-To: "David Wright" Organization: STC Technology Limited, London Road, Harlow, Essex, UK Lines: 35 In article <4199@nigel.udel.EDU> berryh@udel.edu (John Berryhill) writes: #In article <18175.25612d86@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> sloane@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes: #> Why I could probably have #>convinced 20 or 30 people here at the computer center alone, without even #>bothering the faculty or students. Sometimes I sort of regret being honest. # #I can't believe the number of people that believe that campaigning and #canvassing for votes is "dishonest." ... ... ... ... The issue is not one of honesty but of fairness (though many people would feel that to be unfair is a form of dishonesty). The purpose of the new group ballots is to get the net user's opinion on whether the new group is a "good thing" or not. If people on both sides of the argument post articles putting their case and asking for support that's fine (so long as they don't post so many that people get fed up with them -- but that is self limiting as it will generate votes in the opposite direction!). What is seen by many (including myself) as unfair is lobbying by private mail of lots of people who do not know all the issues, are not regular readers of news.groups etc., and who thus vote on the basis of a one-sided request from someone they know, rather than on the basis of published information. Of course our guidelines do not prevent this, so it is 'legal', indeed it is hard to see how it could be prevented totally. But if it becomes common practice, it is going to create some real distortions in the voting results; not the end of the net, but certainly the end of newgroup voting as we know it. Let us hope that it won't come to that. Hopefully the new schemes for choosing the best name during the voting system (STV or perhaps MAUVE) will prevent future sci.aquaria problems, although they too will depend on a sense of goodwill and fairness which have become scarce in some quarters lately. Remember that generosity, goodwill and fairness were the principles upon which the net was built. Regards, "None shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity" David Wright STL, London Road, Harlow, Essex CM17 9NA, UK dww@stl.stc.co.uk ...uunet!mcvax!ukc!stl!dww PSI%234237100122::DWW