Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!looking!brad
From: brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Cabal
Message-ID: <3062@looking.UUCP>
Date: 8 Apr 89 02:46:20 GMT
References: <3010@looking.UUCP> <63@norsat.UUCP> <288@ubbs-nh.MV.COM> <3031@looking.UUCP> <290@ubbs-nh.MV.COM> <291@ubbs-nh.MV.COM> <3230@ddsw1.MCS.COM> <14681@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US> <1989Apr7.030958.11143@sq.com>
Reply-To: brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton)
Organization: Looking Glass Software Ltd.
Lines: 28

In article <1989Apr7.030958.11143@sq.com> msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) writes:
>But I *don't* think that drawing people's names at random is a good idea.
>I think that *this* is the place where net voting is appropriate.

I proposed random selection quite deliberately.  The few attempts I have
seen at elections on usenet have not been what I would call successes.
In fact, the whole problem with rigidly defined newsgroup voting is that
in every vote, there will be a minor violation, and somebody always jumps
up and rants about it.

If UNLAB is elected, that will give it a greater illusion of democratic
power.  People will look to it to make other decisions.  It will somehow
been seen to "represent" usenet in some way.

I oppose that concept.  UNLAB will be a body picked to do a _job_, not
an authority group elected to a position of power.  They will be there
to help me pick the groups to carry on my machine, not to represent
"the people."

The fact is that I run my site, you run your site and nobody is ever
going to change that.  I don't even approve of the illusion of changing it.
UNLAB's "power" (really influence) will come, and should always come, from
the fact that people are willing to use the newsgroup list they produce.

It should not ever pretend to come from somewhere else, such as the fact
that it was somehow elected.
-- 
Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd.  --  Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473