Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!ubc-cs!fornax!miron
From: miron@fornax.UUCP (Miron Cuperman )
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: How to decide -- sci or talk.
Summary: Proposed voting procedure
Keywords: voting
Message-ID: <270@fornax.UUCP>
Date: 4 Feb 90 01:07:35 GMT
References: <7363@tank.uchicago.edu> <13437@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <3320@iitmax.IIT.EDU> <09I13LGxds8@ficc.uu.net>
Reply-To: miron@cs.sfu.ca (Miron Cuperman (Jones/Paul))
Organization: School of Computing Sceience, SFU, B.C., Canada
Lines: 23

In article <09I13LGxds8@ficc.uu.net> jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) writes:
>(1) I prefer sci.philosophy.objectivism ___
>(2) I prefer talk.philosophy.objectivism ___
>(3) No Objectivism group; I hate Reason, Purpose, and Self-Esteem ___
>
>If either (1) or (2) get at least 100 votes, and more than twice
>the number of (3), a group will be created ... and which one gets
>created will depend on which, of (1) and (2), gets more votes.
>
>
>Jeff Daiell

This will split YES votes and increase the possibility that no
group will be created.  I think it is best to have two independent
questions:

(1) YES/NO    for an Objectivism group
(2) SCI/TALK  hierarchy, if the group is created

The first qustion will decide the creation by the guidelines.  The
second will decide the hierarchy by majority.

	Miron Cuperman <miron@cs.sfu.ca>