Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!uhnix1!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: CfD: Interest Groups Surveys Message-ID: Date: 10 Feb 90 14:31:07 GMT References: <22196.25d2eed0@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> Reply-To: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 37 In article <22196.25d2eed0@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> sloane@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes: > 1. sci.astrology > 2. rec.astrology > 3. talk.astrology OK, I'll put this in terms of the modifications I just suggested. > Now suppose that voter 1 doesn't care whether an astrology group is > created or not, but wants to vote against the name sci.astrology. What > would this vote look like? Subject: 32 > Suppose voter 2 doesn't care what the name of the group is, this > person just want SOME astrology group created. What would this vote > look like? Subject: YES > Suppose voter 3 doesn't think that astrology has any place on the net > and opposes any group creation with astrology as a discussion topic. > How would this person vote? Subject: NO > Voter 4 really likes the idea of an astrology group, but hates the > sci.astrology name enough that he/she would prefer to not have a group > rather than name it sci.any. Subject: YES 32 (yes, this isn't as strong a vote as you might like, but given the 2/3 rule it will act as a vote against sci) Preference voting is also an acceptable alternative to the current system, but the name MAUVE has to go. If "Preference Voting" is good enough for the IEEE... -- _--_|\ Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. . / \ \_.--._/ Xenix Support -- it's not just a job, it's an adventure! v "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'