From: steve@bucolix.ncsu.edu (Steve Garnier)
Subject: Re: rec.motorcycles.harley vote acknowledgment
Reply-To: steve@bucolix.ece.ncsu.edu (Steve Garnier)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 20:26:49 GMT

jeq@i88.isc.com (Jonathan E. Quist) writes:
>steve@bucolix.ece.ncsu.edu (Steve Garnier) writes:
>>shz@garage.att.com (Keeper of the 'Tude) writes:
>>>>In article <1992Aug10.232639.7416@nas.nasa.gov> 
>>>>ciotti@wk42.nas.nasa.gov (Robert B. Ciotti) writes:
>>>>+Here is the ack for the rec.motorcycles.harley vote received by
>>>>+Mon Aug 10 16:21:04 PDT 1992
>>>>+laszlo@columbine.cs.colorado.edu Laszlo Nemeth 
>>>>+laszlo@eclipse.cs.colorado.edu Laszlo Nemeth 
>>>Anyone caught stuffing the ballot box should have *all* of their votes
>>>disqualified.
>>While abuse of the ballot box also angers me, I can't agree that the
>...
>Now wait just a minute.  Haven't _any_ of you ever experienced the
>variable reliability of e-mail?  Does all your mail go through in
>an hour?  A day?  A week?  If you sent some mail in, two days later
>saw a vote summary, and your name wasn't in it, would you resend
>the mail to get your vote counted, or just say, "oh, well, it'll
>count anyhow".....?  If you think that e-mail is as reliable as
>paper mail, let me know before I go into business with you.
>If the final vote tally counts more than one vote from a reply address
>where the only difference is the system name (_not_ the domain name),
>then I submit that the final tally is meaningless anyhow.  So why
>not get off Lasz's case?

That's what the vote acknowledgement is for...to ensure that the vote is
received by the vote-taker's machine.  In Laszlo's case, both votes appeared
in the vote ack, so he was not transmitting multiple votes because of "lost"
email.

I briefly considered the possibility you put forth, and dismissed it.
I have never had any email delay of more than one day between university
sites and major orgs such as NASA. (Robert Ciotti's machine has a nasa.gov
address, and Laszlo's machine is definitely a university address.)  That,
and the listing of the RMH vote count leads me to the conclusion that 
cheating (or shall we euphemistically say a "lowering of ethics") permeates
our society.  I know the outcome of that CFV is not affected by the quantity
of multiple votes per person emailed by the cheaters.  I think it's sad that
some individuals fear they have so much to lose/gain, that they will stoop 
to "the ends justifies the means."

If you want to know who they are, just peruse the list below, where I've
delineated *SUSPECTED* cheats.  You might be surprised.  Some people don't
even cheat *well*.  At least it's *FINALLY* over.  :-)

   ---A List Of Suspected Ballot-Box Stuffers---
 CAD8025@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca "Problem Reporting, A" 
 ACAD8059@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca Mike Mychalkiw 
 ADVI8721@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca advisor's utility disk 
 
 FURRJK@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU Joel Furr 
 Furr@cup.portal.com 
 
 sb3t+@andrew.cmu.edu "Shirl G. Grant" 
 sggrant+@pitt.edu Shirley G Grant 
 
 sybase!leighann@Sun.COM Leigh Ann Hussey 
 sybase!leighann@Sun.COM Leigh Ann Hussey Oster 
   ---

I didn't count the guest@junkyard.asd.sgi.com Guest Account, since
some people do read from Guest Accounts.

And before I forget, welcome to USENET, rec.motorcycles.harley!

Steve Garnier - DoD #00000005 - '79 XS1100SF w/ 157K+ miles and *climbing*
KotF (Flame),  KotAM (Anecdotal Motorcycle),  The Daemon's Byte
steve@bucolix.ece.ncsu.edu       "Ineluctably Prolix" - John Norman Sims, Jr.
Come an' get it!  Served up nice an' *hot*!!  Get yer FREEEEE *logorhea*!!!
Newsgroups: news.groups