Re: comp.sw.components

[jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell)]

In article <3176@ficc.uu.net>, peter@ficc.uu.net (Alexina's dad) writes:
> In article <4455@hubcap.UUCP>, billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe,2847,) writes:

> 
> >    it is my understanding that the mailing list is counted as a block of
> >    "YES" votes when such a transition is being considered.
> 
> Not so. I am currently running the vote for comp.unix.i386. I suppose I could
> have included the entire complement of the existing mailing list, but that
> would be unethical. 



Here, here!  Peter is ABSOLUTELY right.   Casting a vote in someone's
name w/o that individual's permission is *extremely* unethical --- and
startlingly presumptuous.  Can you imagine, in those States where
voters list party affiliation when registering, if all those who
registered as Democratic, Republican, or Libertarian were automatically
listed as having voted a straight ticket for their respective parties?
Or as having voted a certain way on referenda?  

Is there a way to preclude such permissionless autovoting on the net?
If so, I urge adoption of that device -- even tho I personally will 
vote yes on just about any newsgroup, I *don't* want someone doing so
in my name.

Jeff Daiell


Hmmm -- one advantage to the autovoting in public elections, tho.  
There are several states where Independents outnumber partisan
registrations.  If those States would adopt the None Of The
Above option, and autovote Independents as NOTA votes ... {|8^)]




 -- 
IN CASE OF EMERGENCY EVACUATION, REMEMBER THE TIME-HONORED RULE:

           WOMEN AND CHILDREN AND TECH AIDES FIRST.