From: edward_ohare@nospam.yahoo.com.invalid 
  
 On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:47:15 -0700, Russ Allbery  
 wrote: 
  
  
 >It's worth noting that even if they are block-voting, they're certainly 
 >not the only block YES and NO voters.  If they don't actually exist, 
 >that's one thing (but not something that has been established), but if 
 >they're real people who are just voting on proposals for reasons other 
 >than news.groups regulars might prefer, they're definitely not the only 
 >ones, and we haven't done anything about this in the past. 
  
  
 My comments weren't intended as a recommendation but rather as an 
 analysis of the situation with what I considered to be speculation 
 with a reasonable basis.  There appears to be a developing willingness 
 to adopt a lesser standard of evidence than "beyond a reasonable 
 doubt" when dealing with matters such as the existence of an actual 
 person behind a voting address or ballot box stuffing.  I don't object 
 to this, however, I think any decision different from what is 
 indicated by an initial vote should be made by eliminating votes 
 rather than a vague standard that the result should appear correct. 
  
 There is a big difference, in my mind, between people who are Usenet 
 participants apparently engaging in block voting and those who are not 
 Usenet participants engaging in block voting.  In the latter, at 
 minimum, improper distribution of ballots must be involved. 
  
 I am opposed to the scheme recently mentioned in news.groups to only 
 allow votes from addresses with a verifiable history of posting to 
 Usenet.  I recently argued against such a scheme, and another one for 
 voter registration, in us.config. 
  
 However, the decision to eliminate the FMJ votes appears to me to be 
 based on a lesser standard than "beyond reasonable doubt".  It is a 
 move to a decision making process based on a lesser requirement of the 
 preponderance of the evidence that I believe will eventually result in 
 decisions against the Strombolis.  While I object to invalidating a 
 result because it doesn't appear right to the powers that be, I don't 
 object at all to invalidating individual votes based on less than 
 "beyond reasonable doubt" and then letting the results fall where they 
 may. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)