Xref: utzoo news.groups:15291 news.admin:7872
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!samsung!usc!ucla-cs!rutgers!columbia!cs!amb
From: amb@cs.columbia.edu (Andrew Boardman)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin
Subject: STV and the foo.aquaria vote and stuff...
Summary: this is ridiculous...
Keywords: fishy voting
Message-ID: <516@cs.columbia.edu>
Date: 30 Nov 89 00:45:07 GMT
References: <4999@freja.diku.dk>
Reply-To: amb@cs.columbia.edu (Andrew Boardman)
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Columbia University Department of Quiche Eating
Lines: 18


What is the point of trying to run a vote with a voting system that
hasn't even stabilized yet?  People are not going to vote simply because...
-they will think they have already voted on "the aquaria thing"
-they (correctly) percieve the system to be a kludge; note that Peter
 didn't actually go so far as to explain how the votes would be counted
 except for the magic invocation of the phrase "100 vote margin".  Margin
 over what?  I for one am not going to vote on this one at least until I
 know what will happen to my vote...

[For the record, I voted "yes" on the first one.  If you read the traffic
in sci aquaria (if you don't get it (yet) in your neck of the woods I'll
even give you a feed (if NY Telephone ever goes off-strike and gets
around to fixing my lines, but anyway...)) you will realize that it's a
hell of a lot more scientific than most of the other crap under sci
anyway...]

/a


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com