Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!execu!sequoia!dewey
From: dewey@sequoia.UUCP (Dewey Henize)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: verification of Brad's vote
Message-ID: <396@sequoia.UUCP>
Date: 21 Mar 89 05:20:23 GMT
References: <1989Mar20.181533.22112@utzoo.uucp>
Reply-To: dewey@sequoia.UUCP (Dewey Henize)
Organization: Home for Recalcitrant Hackers
Lines: 55

In article <1989Mar20.181533.22112@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
{A lenghty, detailed, and systematic analysis of the votes that HE says Brad
passed on to him}
>My conclusion is unless implausible sources of bias were present, it
>is fair and correct to state that the voters support Brad's proposal
>by a majority of approximately 473 to 32.  I further conclude that it
>is most unlikely that the removal of any credible source of bias
>could reverse such a lopsided result.  I finally conclude that Brad's
>survey, although perhaps not entirely above reproach on small details,
>was honestly run, and that the results he announced were at least
>approximately correct.
>-- 
>Welcome to Mars!  Your         |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
>passport and visa, comrade?    | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu


And of course, since you're a fellow countryman, your count is a lie, totally
biased, and you're covering for Brad, since we've all been bombarded with
the 'fact' that what Brad is doing is completely against <drum roll> the
SPIRIT OF USENET!  So, since we KNOW that, we have to suspect you too, and
we have to discard this vote.  Surely the only way we can get a 'fair' vote
is not to have anyone who has any idea what usenet is count, but instead head
for our nearest skid row, find a double amputee with a minimal IQ who COULDN'T
POSSIBLY have any idea what is going on.  Only votes that are approved in
advance by the folks against Brad can be sent to this paragon of even-
handedness, and even then if the vote goes against Brad we can always just
do it again.  Heck, do it enough times and no one but the screaming few will
even bother to vote - they won't get their 100+ majority, but in the SPIRIT
OF USENET they'll proclaim that as the defenders of the the net they have
found a 'sense of the net' and that, instead of using the earlier votes, they
have NOW found the 'real meaning of all the voters' and begin screaming anew
for Brad's removal.
 
Now, for the pinheads that don't detect this already, the above was sarcasm.
Henry did more work in his verification than most folks have ever considered
doing for the net.  His analysis and verification indicates that unless you
want to assume that proportionally 473/32 folks are totally in the dark and
only a few enlightened people see the horrible actions being perpetrated 
behind our collective backs, then THERE IS MAJOR SUPPORT FOR BRAD IN THIS
ENDEAVOR.

Read his article.  READ IT CAREFULLY.  Then really try to convince yourself
that all those folks are just too stupid to understand.  If you can do that,
then you might begin to wonder what possible reason there is for the folks
that keep screaming for 'votes'.  And more 'votes'.  And more, until they
get an outcome they want.

Sheesh.

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
| There is nothing in the above message that can't be explained by sunspots.  |
|                   execu!dewey             Dewey Henize                      |
|         Can you say standard disclaimer?  I knew you could.  Somehow...     |
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-