From: edward_ohare@nospam.yahoo.com.invalid 
  
 On 8 Sep 2004 10:09:25 -0700, aahz@pobox.com (Mean Green Dancing 
 Machine) wrote: 
  
 >In article <7kbuj0p64k3u6hoaf0kodvlabsn8kk92a2@4ax.com>, 
 >edward ohare   wrote: 
 >>On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 15:42:12 +0000, newgroups-request@isc.org (NAN 
 >>Team) wrote: 
 >>> 
 >>>It was brought to our attention that the following NO voters on the 
 >>>recent comp.os.linux.xbox proposal are from the cast of the movie 
 >>>Full Metal Jacket: 
 >> 
 >>OK, Tony, if this stands, your family provided the margin of victory. 
 >>So y'all better get out there posting to this new group.  Otherwise, 
 >>I'd say the Stromboli "yes" votes in the future are in danger of being 
 >>considered not legitimately cast. 
 > 
 >While I'm sympathetic to that POV, YES votes may legitimately be cast if 
 >one only intends to read the resulting group (and I have so voted in the 
 >past). 
  
  
 Under normal circumstances, I agree that an intent to read a group is 
 sufficient reason to vote YES.  However, the Strombolis have created a 
 situation where a statement that they were going to read a group lacks 
 credibility. 
  
 Its not likely a group of, what is it, 17 people (?) would have a 
 positive interest in several groups on varying topics in a short 
 period of time.  Its not likely that the same people might be, as a 
 near block, opposed to the same particular groups for technical or 
 "good of Usenet" reasons. 
  
 Several more instances of near block voting will result in a 
 conclusion based on the preponderance of the evidence that the 
 Strombolis are block voting without regard to intention to use a 
 group, in the event of YES votes, or sincere technical objections in 
 the event of NO votes.  So posting to groups where they voted YES and 
 trying to improve proposals before voting NO will become important. 
 It will be of their own making if their votes are rejected. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)