Xref: utzoo talk.religion.newage:4958 news.groups:14815
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!samsung!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!att!cbnewsc!rjp1
From: rjp1@cbnewsc.ATT.COM (on the jagged cliffs of Ngranek)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage,news.groups
Subject: Re: Poll results on newsgroup name
Keywords: t.r.newage
Message-ID: <4935@cbnewsc.ATT.COM>
Date: 20 Nov 89 21:57:28 GMT
References: <982@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> <50495@oliveb.olivetti.com> <9020@hoptoad.uucp>
Lines: 30

In article (Tim Maroney) writes:

> It is ridiculous to call a poll decisive when, of 30 votes, no opinion
> came close to achieving a majority, only a weak plurality (10 votes).

> So, as the founder of the talk.religion.newage group, I protest very
> strongly the attempt to narrow its scope to Neo-Paganism exclusively.
> However, I do understand and respect the idea of renaming it to some
> term which more accurately reflects the originally inclusive intent of
> the group.  I suggest that any of the following would be good
> alternatives (ranked in the order of my preferences, from best to
> worst):
 
  [really nice list deleted]

> But in any case, let's hear the end of this nonsense about ten votes
> out of tens of thousands of people on the network defining the proper
> direction of discussion.


As the t.r.newage founder, I haven't seen many postings from you!? 
But, be that as it may, I agree with what you're saying.  10 votes 
do not make a consensus. 

I guess we were just pissin' in the wind...  :^)



--									    --
rj pietkivitch							att!ihlpa!rjp1