From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-07 12:33:15
christopher diggins wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joel de Guzman"
>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>> One disadvantage of posting a preliminary tally is that it encourages
>>> people to try to influence public opinion. I just typed and erased
>>> something that hints at my preferences about three times. Make that
>>> four. Better press send now before I do something unethical.
>> I was afraid about this happening. I hinted on progressively
>> posting the results in my preliminary heads-up message to the
>> boost moderators list and no-one objected, so I thought I'd give
>> transparency more weight. Perhaps I'm wrong. If you guys think
>> that a continuous tally is not a good idea, I'm all ears.
> People who have not yet voted are now more likely vote for the currently
> posted top candidates. I for one would have voted differently now than
> before, please remove the list.
I was hoping Boost folks are more inteligent than that! Be reminded
that boost has always been holding public library reviews and
taking in votes, for or against the acceptance of a library, all
publicly and progresively in the duration of the review. Yes,
there's a disadvantage in that approach. However, I tend to
believe and trust that people in boost are intelligent enough
not to be swayed by what's popular. If we weren't, we could have
all gone Java with all its hype!
That said, I respect your opinion and the opinion of others.
I'll wait a bit for others.
-- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk