From: karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: DAVE HAYES MAY BE RIGHT!
Date: 12 Dec 1992 01:49:22 GMT
Organization: Mindcraft, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: pangea.stanford.edu
Summary: Not a chance.

In article <1992Dec12.002031.7215@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish) writes:
>>>>The very fact that a ballot pups up right in front of their noses is
>>>>a pretty good hint that a vote is going on.
>>>Prove that it popped up in front of their noses.
>>Dave, it's up to you to prove that "they" would
>>have cared if "they" had seen the CFV.
>
>Sounds just as hard as proving that it popped up in front of
>their noses. 

It would be harder, and that's just the point.  Your
whole campaign is based on the premise that many more
people would participate in usenet votes if they knew
about them.  You'll have to provide some substantiation
for this claim before you can expect others to change
the guidelines.

>It's interesting...when I ask someone else to prove something,
>(which I've been asked to do many times) they rebut with 
>"No, YOU prove it". 

When someone answers one of your challenges, you respond
by setting unreasonable standards of proof.  The challenge
in response is entirely approriate.

>This is just as bad or good as saying "No I won't prove it". Since
>I've already taken a position of the latter, I will continue to.
>But it's an interesting observation. 

OK, I'll prove the assertion to the extent that it can
be proved.  I'll present as fact statements that have
been accepted by the participants in the discussion thus far.

  - The CFV was posted several times to rec.music.synth.

  - Assuming reliable news propagation, several copies
    of the CFV arrived on r.m.s subscribers' news spools.

  - Assuming competent news system management and not-too-buggy
    news reading software, the CFV articles were made
    available to readers of r.m.s.

  - Users who read all articles in r.m.s had the CFV
    presented to them.  Users who did not see the CFV
    either (a) did not read r.m.s or (b) chose not
    to read the specific articles.

    The ballot (CFV article) popped up in front of their
    noses unless they chose to prevent it from doing so.

Since all usenet guidelines are based on the assumption that
the news software works, objections to my second and third
points are beyond the scope of this discussion.  They address
quality of implementation and not fairness of design principles.

>>This business of claiming that "{the silent majority|
>>God|the unfairly disenfranchised multitude} is on my side"
>>is a favorite tactic of scoundrels.  You're using it in
>>a way that smacks of demagoguery: using scary arguments
>>about fairness and freedom to claim that an
>>injustice has been done, without ever establishing
>>that there's really a constituency that feels wronged.
>
>And this business of asking for established proof,

Dave, you're the one who's been asking for absolute
proof though you know it's not available, and twisting
others' words to seem absolutist when you know they're not.

>failing to
>answer one's opponent's calls for proof after this asking,

This is the second time I've answered one of your idiotic
demands for Truth.  You get that from religion, not from
philosophy or politics and most emphatically not from
usenet.

>and implying that someone is a scoundrel

I thought I did more than imply that, Dave.  I accused
you directly of being intellectually dishonest and I
substantiated the accusation.

>is usually used by people who
>want to take unfair control of things.

Pretty lame, Dave.

>Are you one of those?

No.

>>I fully expect that Dave will answer by extracting part of
>>this posting and considering it out of context, as he's
>>been doing for weeks.  Please prove me wrong and show that
>>you can face criticism, Dave.
>
>I'm not proving anything. And I can face your best shot. :-)

And ignore it, because you're arguing in a sterile,
closed logical system that has no connection to
reality.

When will you tell us how to fix usenet, Dave?  If you
see the same news.groups articles that I do, you get
about three requests a day to put up or shut up.
--

    Chuck Karish          karish@mindcraft.com
    (415) 323-9000 x117   karish@pangea.stanford.edu