comp.unix.* results
Laird J. Heal
laird at chinet.chi.il.us
Sun Dec 16 11:26:15 AEST 1990
In article <11409 at pt.cs.cmu.edu> jgm at fed.expres.cs.cmu.edu (John G. Myers) writes:
>I fail to understand Laird's math. According to his post, the votes
>were:
>
>That makes 144+19= 163 votes for wizards and 16+61=77 against, making
>the proposal fail the 100-vote margin by 14 votes.
I was hoping not to have to use the clause, but I was not sure that there
would be enough votes in a tripartite scheme to carry the 100+ margin, so
I created a quintapartite scheme.
I also mailed individual attributions in part in order to head off too
much flambescence after the vote - as I mentioned, several voters changed
to "only" (or in at least one case from "only") so I have to assume that
they got the message.
To quote from the Call:
If you want to vote to replace comp.unix.internals only if
your choice passes, use 'comp.unix.esoterica only' or
'comp.unix.wizards only' on the Subject: line, otherwise I
will not count your vote against the 2/3 majority needed to
conform to the Guidelines. That is, a vote reading
Subject: comp.unix.esoterica only
is a vote against comp.unix.wizards but a vote reading
Subject: comp.unix.esoterica
is a vote for esoterica but possibly also for wizards.
and that is how I tallied them.
--
Laird J. Heal The Usenet is dead!
Here: laird at chinet.chi.il.us Long Live the Usenet!
More information about the Comp.unix.internals
mailing list