HW : Glastonbury voting

[Sprawl]

Well, pardon my dose of reality, but if we didn't "cheat" we would be the
only "group"
voting who didn't.  Fact is, since I know there is ZERO chance of my
attending, or
purchasing any resultant product, I am "cheating" by voting at all.

And you can, if you like, consider this more a way of countering the lack of
exposure
suffered by the band.

I'll bet that the count-keepers have some statistical formulae to account
for ballot stuffing,
anyway.

No flames, but I -do- think you are being whiney, a bit.  And a little
naive, too.

Substitute the words "pangs of guilt," or "rush of self-righteousness" for
the words "streak of
honesty," and I have no problem with your statement.

Hey-  just bein' honest.  =)

Rj



>Pardon my streak of honesty here but are we not an organized and potent
>enough force without "cheating".  I think the festival would like one vote
>one person. Flame me if I am being whiney.
>
>Mike
>
>PS this comment is NOT directed to Rj or anyone else in particular.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: BOC/Hawkwind Discussion List [mailto:BOC-L at LISTSERV.SPC.EDU]On
>Behalf Of Sprawl
>Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2000 8:10 AM
>To: Multiple recipients of list BOC-L
>Subject: Re: HW : Glastonbury voting
>
>
>Confirmed-  The site keeps track by IP address.
>Vote, go offline, release IP address, login again, vote, etc.
>But too many votes stacked in a short period will likely set off
>alarms, I would guess..
>
>Cookies are irrelevant, because I NEVER accept cookies.
>
>"I'm sorry, but someone with the IP address xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx has
>already voted. Please click back."
>
>Rj