Nuxx:B76bae96-3c14-4fb9-8b58-b5edb630fb07@r17g2000vbc.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!r17g2000vbc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.moderation Subject: Re: URCM - witch hunt/"straw poll" - deadline approaching Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 15:44:20 -0800 (PST) References: <8t5b0pFl1nU1@mid.individual.net>  Lines: 41 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.71.49.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1299023060 14424 127.0.0.1 (1 Mar 2011 23:44:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 23:44:20 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: r17g2000vbc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 2998 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.moderation:38303

On Mar 1, 11:14=A0pm, Tom Crispin  wrote: > On Tue, 01 Mar 2011 22:46:42 +0000, Matt B > >  wrote: > >Have you all emailed your responses in? > > >I've just sent mine in, although I haven't received any confirmation > >yet. =A0I wonder if Ian's system is on the blink again tonight. > > >Can any of the moderators tell us if confirmations are being sent out? > > >Also it'd be nice to know when the "results" are going to be published? > > =A0Will it be shortly after the close of poll, or will I be kept waitin= g > >in suspense for days/weeks? > > I posted my response to the group. > > I asked for confirmation that I would not be disenfranchised by the > later suggestion that votes open to public scrutiny would be > discarded, with only those made covertly counting. > > I received no response. > > I decided not to make a covert vote as it could easily be altered. > > I suggest that only those votes made publically to the group should > count.

But Chapman and co are too cowardly to spout their ultra-intolerant bashing of Matt B and his opinions in public! So actually yes, I agree with you: if only public votes are counted then the more unreasonable and indefensible ones will be filtered out.

However, I still think (or at least sincerely hope) that Matt B will comfortably "win" the poll even if private votes are counted (whether or not public votes are conveniently ignored). Whether there will be "mistakes" in the counting of the results (like the "mistakes" in the counting of rejected posts for Matt B and Judith) is entirely another matter, and sadly, I doubt I'm the only one by a long chalk who has serious concerns about that side of things.