Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!udel!princeton!phoenix!djgrabin From: djgrabin@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Joseph Grabiner) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: CfD: Interest Group Surveys (was: STV new group proposal in 25 lines) Keywords: single transferrable votes STV newsgroup creation interest group Message-ID: <13779@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> Date: 11 Feb 90 18:50:47 GMT References: <1990Feb7.224449.8453@diku.dk> Reply-To: djgrabin@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Joseph Grabiner) Organization: Princeton University, NJ Lines: 39 In article peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: >The vote is in two parts. First, indicate on the subject line what your vote >on the existence of the group is: YES or NO. Then, following the YES or NO >indicate your preferences for a name. If you have no preference, leave this >part blank. The preferences should be handled as listed in the original call >for discussion, except that no "abstain" entry would be used. Only list the >groups that you have a preference for. Your preferences will be counted even >if you vote against the group. >Subject: YES bdcaf on the JUNGIAN vote. This system doesn't allow expression of a common opinion: that you dislike a particular name so much that you will vote against a group with that name. When the *.aquaria vote came up, I would have abstained on rec.aquaria, but I voted NO on sci.aquaria. Under this system, I wouldn't have been able to vote at all, because I certainly didn't want to vote NO on rec.aquaria. If the surveys are done separately, first selecting a name by a binding STV vote and then holding a regular vote on the name selected by the net, this problem is removed, at the cost of adding some time to the group creation process. In many cases, the extended time isn't needed. The STV with YES, NO, and ABSTAIN votes, which has been proposed here before, solves this problem. Another solution, which I have proposed before, is to say that any group which passes despite 100 NO votes, which usually means unresolved dispute over the name, must then have an STV survey to determine the name. My proposal is somwehat simpler, but I prefer the STV with YES, NO, and ABSTAIN included. This would allow me to vote: YES: ABSTAIN: rec.aquaria rec.aquarium rec.pets.fish NO: sci.aquaria sci.aquarium -- My name is David Joseph Grabiner. I am called djgrabin@phoenix.princeton.edu. My name is called David. I am the person solely responsible for these opinions.