Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) 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: <1AP1WZAxds13@ficc.uu.net> Date: 12 Feb 90 02:22:09 GMT References: <1990Feb7.224449.8453@diku.dk> <13779@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> Reply-To: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 18 In article <13779@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> djgrabin@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Joseph Grabiner) writes: > 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. Abstain from the YES/NO part and vote on the other groups in the choice section. Because of the 2/3 rule, that's as good as voting against the group. (let's see, a=sci.aquaria, b=sci.aquariums, c=rec.aquaria, d=rec.aquariums, e=rec.pets.fish) Subject: N/A cde I suspect the idea can do with some tuning, Perhaps a simple majority in the name part should be enough. But it's a lot less complex than the YES/NO/ABSTAIN proposal... which I also believe to be incomplete in its explanation of vote counting. I haven't looked too closely at it. -- _--_|\ 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?" `-_-'