comp.unix.* results

[Laird J. Heal]

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!