Need help building your intranet? Click here!
| Navigational map -- for text only please go to the bottom of the page ||Forums|
Readers' Choice Awards (siteadm) Fri, 13 Jun
New Poll = Hypocricy In Exemplar (up_yours) Tue, 17 Jun
Did I offend? (rparker) Tue, 17 Jun
Why not show results? (FatBrother) Tue, 17 Jun

The only possible conclusion . . .

Posted by: CRConrad
Date posted: Wed Jun 18 0:55:15 PDT 1997

. . . is that they won't publish the results -- or even their _r_e_a_s_o_n_s_ for invalidating the first poll, and for
refusing to post the results -- precisely because the results do _n_o_t_ prove that the ballot was stuffed at the first poll.
If it were anything else, they could at least tell _w_h_y_ they won't publish the results.

Well, there's one other, even more sinister explanation: That they _d_o_ indeed prove that the
ballot was stuffed -- by Sandy Reed, in favour of NT. I originally proposed this, only half-jokingly,
on the "Web-based voting" forum (still available on "Archived Soap Box Forums") where
the previous poll's results were discussed. Ms Reed neither confirmed nor denied it . . .


Christian R. Conrad


Respond | Search | Help


For questions or comments, email the Forums Editor

kristin_kueter@infoworld.com