From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-07 12:48:41
christopher diggins <cdiggins_at_[hidden]> writes:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joel de Guzman" <joel_at_[hidden]>
> To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
> Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 11:31 AM
> Subject: [boost] Re: Logo Contest Current Tally
>> 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.
Well, now Joel and Jeff Garland have both told me by private mail that
there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with having a discussion about
what's worth voting for, and I am basically convinced. I think certain
aspects of the logo are more important than others and should be
considered. But before I start blurting out any specifics, let's hear
from the group. Is there any reason we shouldn't talk about how to
choose? We do almost everything at boost by public consensus. Why
not this time?
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk