Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!maytag!looking!brad From: brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton) 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: <96250@looking.on.ca> Date: 15 Feb 90 06:04:17 GMT References: <1990Feb7.224449.8453@diku.dk> <13779@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <1AP1WZAxds13@ficc.uu.net> <6310@ncar.ucar.edu> Organization: Looking Glass Software Ltd. Lines: 20 Class: misc Sometimes I think it would be a good idea to remove the "discussion phase" from the guidelines. Yes, sometimes the discussion causes people to change their minds, but it's pretty rare, and I doubt it has much effect, except the negative effect of making the 'vote' about personalities and names and other meaningless issues. Have you ever decided to "vote" yes for a group because the discussion phase convinced you there was interest in the group, and you wouldn't have "voted" so otherwise? The discussion phase only seems to cause NO votes based on pointless issues, and perhaps a few YES votes to counter anticipated NOs. Why do we have it? We can discuss what we need during the survey. Your survey response is supposed to indicate YOUR interest in the group, not your opinion of the debate! Who gets changed from YES to NO by discussion, except over the name etc.? Nobody. People get changed from not-vote to NO. That's about it. -- Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473