topic alternatives

[Michael Miroslav Korcok <mk48@cornell.edu>]

yeah, i suppose the topic committee does like the list.

by all accounts, the topic committee did what it set out to do.  
the announced goals at the start of the process were "diversity" and
"creativity":  the list does both of those things admirably.

if i might provide an analogy: we have been given a ballot with Clinton,
Perot, Stalin, Hitler, Hoe, and Socks to choose from.  diverse and
creative, yesssirrreee.  but the trouble is that mom and pop in Kansas
will look at the choices, smile briefly, and vote for Clinton without
much thinking (env reg).  oh sure, our crazy uncle in Florida might vote
for Perot just to keep his spot as our crazy uncle (clean acts).  but
the ballot says "landslide" which is "early release".

so, a suggestion:  an additional standard for topic committee
deliberations ought to be ELECTABILITY.  will folks vote for it?
i think that ELECTABILITY was forgotten this time around.

so, get rid of one or two of the fringe candidates and replace them with
less diverse and creative but palatable alternatives?

10 days to go...
michael korcok

---

Follow-Ups:

• Re: topic alternatives & ELECTABILITY (SP?)
• From: "Russell T. Church" <rchurch@frank.mtsu.edu>

---

• Prev by Date: swearing good
• Next by Date: Re: swearing good
• Prev by thread: Re: swearing goodRe: Korcok the Learned..
• Next by thread: Re: topic alternatives & ELECTABILITY (SP?)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page