Sender: info-hol-request@edu.uidaho.cs.ted
Errors-To: info-hol-request@edu.uidaho.cs.ted
From: Albert Camilleri <ac@com.hp.hpl.hplb>
Message-Id: <9203121659.AA27825@eeyore.hpl.hp.com>
Subject: Re: CALL FOR VOTES - CALL FOR VOTES
To: claesen@be.imec
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 92 16:59:10 GMT
Cc: info-hol@edu.uidaho.cs.ted


Since Luc's announcement inviting votes for the organizers of HOL 93,
a couple of messages were sent out:
 1st: Phil Windley tentatively withdrew Idaho because of the potential
      of splitting a US vote,
 2nd: Jim Grundy made a suggestion for an alternative voting system to
      prevent the above.

Then came complete silence!

So now I'm not actually sure if Idaho is still in (or back in),
or which system we should vote by.

At the risk of confusing the situation further, but in the hope
of defusing it, I have another (hopefully more humourous)
suggestion for electing HOL workshop hosts. This system is also used
in a wide range of applications, ranging from the World Cup in soccer,
to the local raffle. It's called `luck of the draw', and works by
sticking all the names in a bag and pulling one out!

This system can be implemented as follows:
  All candidates email their wish to organise the workshop to the
  current organiser just before the actual workshop. Then during
  the workshop dinner, all candidates names are put in a bag and a
  totally neutral person (e.g. Katriel ;-)) makes the draw. Bingo!
  This way: there are plenty of witnesses to ensure a fair draw,
  and     : the more candidates there are from a particular continent,
            the higher the probability of the workshop going there.

I don't for a minute expect my suggestion to be taken seriously,
but I'm wondering whether this business of where to organise the
workshop is being taken too seriously.

Albert