Xref: utzoo news.admin:7848 news.groups:15237
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!spdcc!xylogics!cloud9!jjmhome!cpoint!alien
From: alien@cpoint.UUCP (Alien Wells)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.groups
Subject: Re: Fixing the unbroken
Message-ID: <2974@cpoint.UUCP>
Date: 30 Nov 89 16:53:26 GMT
References: <7139@ficc.uu.net>
Reply-To: alien@cpoint.UUCP (Alien Wells)
Followup-To: news.admin
Organization: Clearpoint Research Corp., Hopkinton Mass.
Lines: 22

In article <7139@ficc.uu.net> jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) writes:
>
>All of the proposals for new voting schemes -- and they seem
>to be getting hairier by the moment -- ignore one fact:
>the status quo works pretty well.  An occasional abuse,
>like con.aquaria, does happen, but I'd hate to see the
>current nature of the net abandoned in an overly-zealous
>reach to stamp out all possible problems.  

Oh really, why don't you check out the current proposal for sci.groupware?
Or how about the name controversy in the *.pagan, *.newage, *.nature-worship,
*.... proposal going on?

Usenet voting has a serious problem.  It can't deal with multiple names.  If
concensus isn't reached (and it often can't be), it is the whim of the 
proposer to pick the name that will be voted on.  If it passes, a better 
name has no chance.

-- 
--------|	Rest assured that a walk through the ocean of most souls
Alien   |   		would scarcely get your feet wet.	- Deteriorata
--------|     decvax!frog!cpoint!alien      bu-cs!mirror!frog!cpoint!alien


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com