rja@edison.GE.COM (rja) (03/08/89)
In article <oY4h9yy00hYP10ClAH@cs.cmu.edu>, rpd@cs.cmu.edu (Richard Draves) writes: % I don't think the voting will be fair. Nathaniel cross-posted this to a % widely-read Andrew bboard (used for general announcements), giving readers the % option of automatically sending a yes vote. However, there wasn't a no vote % alternative. (The alternative was not sending a vote at all.) Just because % sending a no vote is much more painful for the hundreds/thousands of readers % of the Andrew bboard, the voting results will be tremendously biased. % % I think Nathaniel should discard all votes from the andrew.cmu.edu mail % domain. % Rich I agree with Richard Draves (quoted above). I hereby publicly rescind my former Yes vote to comp.sys.andrew on the grounds that the voting procedure has been biased. This vote bias tends to leave a poor impression of CMU folks amongst the net-at-large and is unfortunate. I have also sent e-mail to rescind my vote and urge others to do the same. rja@edison.CHO.GE.COM
lear@NET.BIO.NET (Eliot Lear) (03/13/89)
The point is moot. There now exists a comp.soft-sys.andrew in the ``inet'' distribution. This can be promoted to ``world'' if someone wants to continue the vote, or start a new one. It should be noted that the current newsgroup does not carry the multimedia messages. -- Eliot Lear [lear@net.bio.net]
nsb+@andrew.cmu.edu (Nathaniel Borenstein) (03/13/89)
> *Excerpts from ext.nn.news.groups: 8-Mar-89 comp.sys.andrew voting biased* > *rja@edison.GE.COM (1030)* > I agree with Richard Draves (quoted above). I hereby publicly rescind > my former Yes vote to comp.sys.andrew on the grounds that the voting > procedure has been biased. This vote bias tends to leave a poor > impression of CMU folks amongst the net-at-large and is unfortunate. I presume from his message that rja read the original Draves complaint but none of its resolution. As I made clear at the time, I promptly sent out another vote that made it equally easy for people to vote NO automatically, and in fact I did receive several NO votes via this mechanism. You should be careful, when you've fallen way behind reading news, not to answer one message until you've seen how many followup messages there already have been. You're weeks behind the times on this one, and the problem has long since been cleared up. By the way, the vote I conducted was intended to create a group with world distribution; I'd still like to see an upgrade. The vote is still going on, and it is still a landslide. The current vote is 184 to 7; if you take out all CMU responses, whether automatic or not, you still have a vote of 125 to 2. Come on, people, this just is NOT a controversial newsgroup creation, lets stop arguing about it.